Nikkei: Nintendo patent infringment royalties case has been overturned

#1
From ZhugeEX

Remember this article a couple of years back where Nintendo had to pay royalties over 3DS patent infringement-
Nikkei seems to be reporting that the decision has been overturned and Nintendo actually won the case.

Based on this case from 2014 where they had to pay royalties for every 3DS sold for seemingly infringing on some patents
Report confirmed by Chris Reeds:
Nikkei seems to be reporting that the decision has been overturned and Nintendo actually won the case

yep, that’s correct. something like ‘the (American) court ruled that it did not infringe on the patent’
https://twitter.com/ccharlesreed/status/724667534956318721

Nintendo's statment:
Nintendo’s comment to Nikkei: ’this ruling affirms our original assertion, and is an appropriate decision’
https://twitter.com/ccharlesreed/status/724671612671258624
 
#4
#9
I dunno if it's selective news articles, but Nintendo appears to have some damn good patent attorneys on staff and under retainer because they rarely lose these cases. Maybe they don't lose in court, anyway, but those guys/gals obviously ain't working for free.
 
#11
If this case was in an active appeal the whole time, I doubt Nintendo paid anything out to the other party. At most, there probably would have been a court appointed Trust where payments were made or a certain lump sum deposit made pending the final outcome.
 
#20
There were lots of glasses-free 3D displays long before 3DS, for instance Fraunhofer Institute demonstrated their free2c 3D displays as early as 2004.
Fuji Finepix 3D W1 (3D camera) had an auto-stereoscopic display in 2009, as did JVC's GS-TD1 3D camcorder from early 2011.

The idea of using a parallax barrier to display 3D is over 100 years old.

This patent trolling nonsense needs to stop.
 
#21
From what I remember reading this case, the patent in question and how the 3DS actually did 3D had damn near no relation to each other. Seemed like the suer got lucky with a judge the first time around.
 
#29
That's good to hear. Nintendo must have some solid-ass lawyers under their employ.
They probably do have very good lawyers, but they must also do a ton of patent research to ensure they either don't infringe on existing patents or pay the patent holders they know they would be infringing on.

Nintendo's hardware team is the the best in the video game industry in my opinion. Although I don't agree with all of the hardware decisions they have made their gear always seems to work well as designed. Other than my NES having the common cartridges not making correct contact issue, I haven't had an Nintendo system or console fail on me, most of which I've bought when they have launched.
 
#30
Looked at the details of the case. It's 1.82% of the wholesale of all 3DS units sold.
On average each is sold at $200 so let's say $3.64.
Let's also say that by the end of the 3DS life cycle it will amount to around 60 million or at least 60 million worth of $200 3DSs.
This would amount to a whopping $218,400,000.
And the judge had also issued an additional $15.1M in damages so $233,500,000.
Admittedly in the high end of the estimates, but still pretty substantial.
If you average out the numbers to the lower end of 3DS prices, $175, it should still total at over 200 Million dollars
 
#31
That's good to hear. Nintendo must have some solid-ass lawyers under their employ.
Nintendo's had good lawyers since the beginning. Should look into their history especially the Universal vs Nintendo case. At the time, the American branch was rather new and Universal was so confident they were going to get their way that they went ahead and acted like they already won. You know, now that I think about it, it's kind of ironic seeing Nintendo licensing their properties to be used for a theme park after all this.