I cant believe MrStickBalls credibility is being called into question

well sony has that kinda money

halil23 said: Avalach21 said: mrstickball is one of the most immature posters on the fourm eveyrone just get over it Agreed! Funny thing is, he's a mod!!

I have to warn the pair of you, your running the risk of punishment if you carry on like this. Especially when MrStickBall is present in this thread

 

Bitmap Frogs said: It's kinda ironic that Sony subsidized rumble on the 360, tho.

 

 No it isn't, do you even know what irony is?

MikeB said: @ mrstickball IMO your posting is flawed and misleading, Microsoft gets money from Immersion Corp, Immersion Corp got money from Sony. In some countries it would be considered anti-competitive to demand money through settlements with other companies as this complicates reaching a settlement at all. Also I think the US patent laws are seriously flawed, lots of rewarded patents are rather meaningless, trivial stuff that has been applied for ages or embody nothing special or groundbreaking but for instance the original involved company which implemented this approach folded, didn't do business in the United States or companies deemed the technology implementations trivial and minor. Regarding your personal issues with me and my posting history, yes I am interested in comparisons between the 360 and PS3. And yes those are IMO clearly to the advantage of the PS3 from a technological perspective. In any case I only try to post well argumented and as much evidence as possible in my postings, personally I don't see anything wrong with that.

Reading this post is mind numbing. Does anyone here have basic knowledge of the legal system...

 

...Obviously not.

 

For a stupidly simple example.

 

I was in a car crash, I got cash compensation, if it turned out in a couple of years that i wasn't as "damaged" as was decided by experts to make payout, I may have to pay back some money.

The whole ROYALITIES thing says it all, obviously there's more depth to the cases than meets the eye of a news article.

OK, its a crap example, but don't make stupid questions, its like asking a rocket scientist how he goes about making his buisness...Don't talk about stuff you don't understand, elementary questions and what not...its embarresing to read!

 

Err... Strictly speaking this should be titled 'MS gets money from Immersion'.

Sony paid Immersion money to settle a legal dispute. That money is now in their bank balance along with other money they earn - I'm presuming that the money from Sony does not constitute their total earnings.

Immersion owes MS money due to a clause stating if they settle with Sony they owe MS money - and pays after legal dispute.

Unless Sony paid Immersion with money marked 'Sony' and Immersion specifically paid MS with the same money then from a financial point of view the money should be considered Immersions.

Also, Immersion should chew out their lawyers for either not spotting or not arguing to alter such a stupid clause in the first place.

BTW I don't like mods posting titles, etc. such as this which are clearly flame bait. If they have an issue with other posts they handle it via PM, etc. This is not how you set an example.

@ Burgles

Some simple examples of why the US patent system is flawed.

For example Microsoft was recently awarded a Page Up and Page down patent.

"In one implementation, pressing a Page Down or Page Up keyboard key/button allows a user to begin at any starting vertical location within a page, and navigate to that same location on the next or previous page."

link

That's IMO ridiculous, it has been in use for ages all across the world and is not remotely invented by Microsoft. Just stupid Microsoft has the opportunity to demand royalties from other companies and sue them.

Also:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_trolls (a good read)

Other stupid Microsoft patents, Using custom in-game soundtracks (implemented in many games well before Microsoft supported this), "treating electronic mail addresses as objects" (good old ancient drag & drop), double clicking for mobile devices, "Organizing and displaying photographs based on time", "the invention may automatically add a 'www.' and a '.com' to the text the user is entering and display this combined text'", etc, etc. The list of stupid patents goes on and on, feel free to browse through them and find your own little gems:

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=0&f=S&l=50&TERM1=Microsoft&FIELD1=ASNM&co1=AND&TERM2=&FIELD2=&d=ptxt

Some more quotes:

"After blatantly copying BlueJ (without reference or attribution), Microsoft have now filed for patent for the functionality they knowingly copied from us.

Why? To sue us out of the market?"

"Microsoft has a penchant for patenting the obvious, but I blame the bureaucrats at the USPTO just as much as I blame the Redmond giant. While Microsoft fills out the forms, the Patent Office actually grants the patents!"

The US patent system is seriously flawed.

DMeisterJ said: Nevermind, scratch my last comment. I like the idea of Sony paying Microsoft, it'll be some awesomely good ways to spin it when Financials for this quarter come out. Look!: In the case of Microsoft posting a profit, but of less than 20.75 million dollars : "Basically, Sony was the only reason MS made a profit this quarter since they made less than the settlement they had with Immersion". Or in the case of MS posting a loss: "Even with Sony's help, MS was unable to make a profit this quarter". FUN!

 

I see no reason why that 20 million would be assesed as part of the entertainment division. Legal settlements are usually put in their own category.

Weird clause though "We want some of what you get from Sony!".

It's like they were betting on their own... and Sony's guilt.

They probably new Sony was going to pay as thought they were at fault more because they copied sony who copied immersion without a patent.

Agreed with reasonable.

Must you be so reasonable?

DMeisterJ said: Agreed with reasonable. Must you be so reasonable?

 

"Agreed with reasonable."