Really disturbing to see so many knee jerk reactions labeling this guy as a troll in the defense of a billion dollar corporation. Dude protected his work, and then proved his case to other citizens in a court of law. Its a wee bit fucked up to declare this patent abuse given some of the things corporations and some real assholes get up to.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Nintendo found guilty for infringing glasses-free 3D patent
- Thread starter Wario64
- Start date
Empyrean Heaven
Member
Or in Amirox's case, ripped the slider off of the goddamn system!
Probably because it could've been used for higher IQ or higher resolution screens, and I'm not fond of the scanline-esque effect. Best you could do there is keep it VERY low and you'd still have to stay in the sweet spot. But Nintendo probably would've just gone for weakers parts with the same IQ and lowered the price instead anyway, or the difference wouldn't be too big (more games reliably hitting 60 FPS with polygonal visuals?)
And yeah, if the screens are fundamentally different... no, this is not a victory to celebrate (though I'm not sure this is patent trolling either, just someone sore over missing out on a deal with Nintendo.) The INTENT of the patent system is protect your invention, but outline how it works so people can then try a different approach to the same end result (glass-less 3D in this case), and thus driving innovation. We don't want to just patent the IDEA of glass-less 3D, that doesn't stifle innovation, just has people stacking claims in whatever pops into mind without actually being created first or even able to be created in the first place. It's the problem with software patents far as I can tell, a lot of them are more for IDEAS than actual APPLICATIONS.
frankie_baby
Member
maybe because some of us have far more idea what we are talking about than the average jury person seeing as most of us either own a 3ds or are at least fairly familiar with how it works
WORLDWIDEWII
Member
Pachter said nintendo's got 8-9 billions in working capital. this is pocket change for them.
ps i want 30million dollars!
ps i want 30million dollars!
Honey Bunny
Member
I hear they ask you how often you play your 3DS on application to law school these days
Plus 99% of other citizens don't have a damn clue how the 3DS works, and of the 1% that do (more likely in here) 99% don't fully understand the intricacies and the differences between this patent and Sharp's 3D, at least without a breakdown first. Hell, I expect 90% don't really understand the point of the patent system, as I could see these kinds of explanations otherwise making them go "oh, then Nintendo isn't guilty."
We're talking about a jury, more like how often you play your 3DS as you walk in for jury selection.
frankie_baby
Member
wasnt aware that jury people had to go to law school?
What? No.
What about the quality of 3D on the 3DS?
Speak for yourself.
Huh?
I did?
Honey Bunny
Member
I was talking about you
But this ruling has no effect on the 3DS itself.
RurouniZel
Asks questions so Ezalc doesn't have to
Well, that's a shame. I doubt Nintendo's going to appeal the decision based on how their response didn't seem to indicate they intend to fight it. Probably for the best, it's not like the guy is asking Nintendo to stop selling the 3DS altogether and better to just cut their losses than wait for a ruling that could go even worse.
That has more to do with 3D not being a main selling point to many people.
frankie_baby
Member
'nintendo is confident the result will be set aside'
that means they are confident they'll win on appeal
And unless I'm missing something there's nothing in there about ceasing 3DS sales like when Sony was found guilty of violating the rumble patent, though I'm still not sure they REALLY violated it given it existed longer than the patent IIRC. Guess that could also bode poorly for Nintendo if some of these assessments in here are right and courts STILL go "nope you're totally stealing."
MaulerX
Member
Yep. Just pay the 30 million and move on. It's chump change in the grand scheme of things. However, this guy can now use this as precedent and go after anyone else that uses the tech.
RurouniZel
Asks questions so Ezalc doesn't have to
Ah, I must have missed that line. My bad.
prag16
Banned
Read the patent. The guy has no case. They will appeal.
I skimmed through the patent in question and while it does describe something about adjusting for the position of the viewer, it does seem to describe what sounds a lot like the parallax barrier used in the 3DS display as well. IIRC one of Tomita's complaints was that Nintendo described his technology to Sharp and Sharp manufactured the display (possibly unknowingly violating the patent). Disclaimer: I am not a patent expert.
Thanks for the clarification. Wasn't sure if they meant that or they were just going to set it aside and move on.
That is something I kind of don't understand. Wouldn't he be able to sue them for potentially more money and possibly stop the 3DS being manufactured with the 3D tech (though it doesn't seem like it is the same)?
That's better.
Well, clearly you're speaking for yourself. But "speak for yourself" is obviously used to frame an objection to something. In other words, I am opposed to your position. Is that clearer/better?
evilromero
Member
I just had an image of a man with a stern frown winking at me.
Vane_MagicCity
Banned
If their appeal fails the next handheld won't have 3D and the next handheld may come out sooner than it otherwise would have. Nintendo hates paying royalties.
eighty(one)
Member
Then the depth slider - which comfortably adjusts the 3d depth of images - must be the core fault.
Also, the camera app - adjusting the 3D via the circle pad :0/
Problem is that the patent says the images are adjusted automatically using sensors to check where the viewer is in realtion to the screen. The 3ds is a manual thing. As other poster pointed out, the 3d camera -> View 3d fotos/videos on 3ds seems to be the closests thing to the patent, and even then you have to discard the automatic adjustment from the patented device to make it like the 3ds.
frankie_baby
Member
and thats the whole reason this claim is ridiculous, yeah he has a really cool patent but glasses free 3d screens and 3d cameras predate it, his patent is basically for automation of 3d focus points, something the 3ds just doesnt do
The patent even mentions glaseless 3d screens on the previous art section....
There is one thing though, if you use the 3d camera on the 3ds it will adjust both images automatically depending on what you are targeting with the camera, I guess that could be related to that part that says "A thecnology has been proposed for determining the distance between the surface of the object and the image pick-up device L (that is, the distance between the pick-up device and the cross point) based on the angle of the optical axus and the spacing between two cameras".
Q
Queen of Hunting
Unconfirmed Member
well he probs took nintendeo to court because he actually spoke with them in 2003 about the tehcnology they infringed ?
Nintendo has too many secrets. People are not fired from Nintendo, they are... taken care of.
Pachterballs
Banned
good.
BassForever
Member
Wonder how much it cost the guy simply to take this to court
Rogue Agent
Banned
Better Call Saul.
KojiKnight
Member
Really Nintendo hasn't lost any money on this yet at all... this will surely (and is heavily implied by OP's quotes) be re-tried and could be overturned or, more likely, it'll finally be settled. The fact that no further payments beyond that 30 mil is mentioned, it seems unlikely that the patent he holds even directly infringes (else there would be licensing issues that would have to be sorted)
This sounds like a case of the US patent laws being retarded again, stifling creativity by issuing patents to ideas instead of products.
This sounds like a case of the US patent laws being retarded again, stifling creativity by issuing patents to ideas instead of products.
Thunder Monkey
Banned
We'll see what happens.
It very well could get overturned because of some sketchy descriptors between what the 3DS does and the tech the patent owner claims is being infringed on.
It very well could get overturned because of some sketchy descriptors between what the 3DS does and the tech the patent owner claims is being infringed on.
A Human Becoming
More than a Member
I've only done a keyword search, but someone clarify this for me: it wasn't a patent for glasses-free 3D that he claimed Nintendo infringed upon, it was a patent on using the technology in a particular way?