Nintendo Forced To Pay Royalties to Tomita on Every 3DS Sold

[OldNewNewOld]

Aaand that was the death of 3D handheld gaming right there. Ouch.

EDIT: Wait. Two Japanese corporations and a US federal judge rule. Don't...they have ways of handling this in Japan?

They have, but bullshit accusation from patent trolls wouldn't pass anywhere besides the US court.
Remember, Samsung has to pay Apple because Apple has patented the rounded rectangle look of a smartphone in the US.

While the current system is an entire joke, patents are actually needed in some way because without them nothing would be stopping other companies from outright stealing the same exact technology that another company uses and call it their own.

Patents are an excuse to make money off of other people's work and since patents are for all intents and purposes monopolies they keep the creator from having to work to make sure their product is anything more than barely acceptable since they are the only ones who can legally provide that product. What should be stopping companies from stealing the tech and calling it their own is not patents but the original owner providing a superior product to any upstarts who try to steal it from them and as a result putting those companies out of business. If they can't do this then they don't deserve to still have that product.

Actually patents are there to prevent big companies from monopolizing your idea.
A small inventor would stand no chance if he couldn't protect his inventions via patenting.

Big companies who have much more money, established advertisement, development and transportation routes could much faster, easier and cheaper develop the same item than the original inventor. The big companies would sell the items much easier than a small company or even a single person.

Patents are must in order to protect the market from monopolies and the original owner. Hell, patents even encourage literally everyone to try and come up with new ideas because everyone can profit from them, which leads to a faster and better development of the industry.

 

[Hairless Mammoth]

I found a link describing the case and patent in a little more detail. They got a lot of similarities between the two designs but it's hard to tell if Nintendo copied it. They still could have seen this patent and said "well maybe we should drop the 3D cameras or design a it a bit more different than this." http://www.wassom.com/tomita-v-nintendo-the-first-augmented-reality-patent-infringement-case.html

This is why I think patents should have an expiry date, so if the technology is not utilized by the patent holder within a certain amount of time then the patent expires and has to be renewed.

US patents last for 20 years from the date of filing for the patent. So, unless they filed for an extension it would make this one last until 2023. It's great for small people and companies to get a start with their idea/invention, but it's also great for a patent troll to hold onto something they had no intention of making or licensing if they really do own the patent. It's also sometimes bad for the inventor that can't get the product on the market themselves and consumers who could have used that device.

Just look at Cracked.com's "6 Inventors Who Changed the World and Got Screwed in Return" or Mary Anderson, the inventor of the windshield wiper. She tried to get it out there and was refused by big corporations, then when the patent expired, it started showing up on a lot of cars in little time. So, maybe patents belonging to companies with legal muscle power should have short expiration dates so they don't use it as patent troll ammo and those that belong to individuals should have something else that doesn't let big business sit around like vultures waiting for something to expire.

Sorry, I went on a little too long. I just hate the abuse this system allows.

 

[Olas]

Ya, because there's just no fucking way Nintendo could possibly have created the 3DS on their own without the vital and unsubstitutable help of Tomita Technologies. Autostereoscopy in a portable device truly is a bold and unforeseen concept that would never have seen the light of day otherwise.[/sarcasm]

I mean come on, is this a joke? Is every single device that uses 3D without glasses going to have to pay the same royalties now, or did Nintendo fall into some sort of specific technical crack? My smartphone has a 3D screen too, are these assholes going to hunt down HTC too?

Obvious patent troll is obvious.

Did Tomita develop, market or try to do anything with the patent? Since they haven't released anything, we can say No.

Pffff why go through all the trouble to do that when you can just let someone else do it for you and then start taking money from them.

I'd like to see patent law change slightly to be where in these cases the patent holder must prove his actual physical technology they produced and developed is found in whatever device or programming they're suing.

To me I think it's more important that the original patent holder prove that they had actually tried/intended to do something with the technology and not just sit on it. If they don't do anything with the technology they've patented all they've done is put red tape around an invention that was going to be created sooner or later anyway. Patents were designed to incentivize innovation, not prohibit it.

Good. Anything that takes money away from Nintendo makes me happy.

Ya, fuck those guys who've brought joy to millions of children around the world for decades and have never harmed you in any way. What fucking nerve they must have right?

I mean it's one thing to just not like a company; it's another to actually express happiness when they have financial trouble.

 

[Sonic Doctor]

When they announced the 2DS, my first thought was that they were making changes because of this lawsuit. I think that they may even stop production on all 3DS models and go strictly with the 2DS. Maybe we will see a clamshell 2DS or maybe they will go ahead and release a new handheld.

Nintendo doesn't like paying royalties, it's the reason you can't play CD/DVD/Blu Rays on your Nintendo consoles.

Considering that 1.82% is so small, I highly doubt this will stop Nintendo from making 3DS handhelds.

At least in the US, regular 3DS's sell for 169.99. Granted part of that is retail markup. Let's say Nintendo makes 100 dollars off every regular 3DS. That is 1.82 dollars that they have to pay out to this company every time. Really that is a drop in the bucket, considering anybody else in Nintendo that gets a cut from those sales, doesn't get near that percentage, so Nintendo is still making plenty of money off their 3DS. Then you got the higher priced 3DS XL.

They would have to be losing 30% or more of their profits to probably have the thought of stopping production to even enter their minds.

 

[person427]

Well, this sucks. Sadly no company is free from patent trolls in the world, let's just hope that Apple doesn't one day decide to sue Nintendo for some "touch interface" or something. If company in the world are the most ruthless when it comes to patent trolling, it would be Apple, the lovely company that trademarked rectangles with rounded corners...>.>

Well good thing Nintendo released their touch screen technology first, if Apple tried to sue for that Nintendo could easily just flip it around.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

This is why I think patents should have an expiry date, so if the technology is not utilized by the patent holder within a certain amount of time then the patent expires and has to be renewed.

US patents last for 20 years from the date of filing for the patent. So, unless they filed for an extension it would make this one last until 2023. It's great for small people and companies to get a start with their idea/invention, but it's also great for a patent troll to hold onto something they had no intention of making or licensing if they really do own the patent. It's also sometimes bad for the inventor that can't get the product on the market themselves and consumers who could have used that device.

Just look at Cracked.com's "6 Inventors Who Changed the World and Got Screwed in Return" or Mary Anderson, the inventor of the windshield wiper. She tried to get it out there and was refused by big corporations, then when the patent expired, it started showing up on a lot of cars in little time. So, maybe patents belonging to companies with legal muscle power should have short expiration dates so they don't use it as patent troll ammo and those that belong to individuals should have something else that doesn't let big business sit around like vultures waiting for something to expire.

Sorry, I went on a little too long. I just hate the abuse this system allows.

This is why I think patents should have an expiry date, so if the technology is not utilized by the patent holder within a certain amount of time then the patent expires and has to be renewed.

Patents actually do expire and require regular renewal. Strangely enough in the old days when this was less the case people would invent something genuinely useful like in the case of Mary Anderson who invented the windshield wiper in 1903. The auto companies rejected it and essentially just waited a few years for the patent before putting them on everything they made. Mary never saw so much as a dime for that invention.

Basically nintendo brought this on themselves. they could have just paid the lumpsum that was owed even at 30 mil it would have been a drop in the bucket and then pay royalties but they got greedy and now will be paying out waaaaay more than that... plus the forward royalties. The prhase Nintendo is 'Pay the Piper what he's due'.

Yes, I realize patients have a long term expiry date, but I think they need a short term one.
And while I do agree that Nintendo did bring this on itself by not paying the lump sum when it had the chance, I can't help but be annoyed at Tomita for not developing the technology themselves and that sueing Nintendo when they did.

 

[WeepingAngels]

When they announced the 2DS, my first thought was that they were making changes because of this lawsuit. I think that they may even stop production on all 3DS models and go strictly with the 2DS. Maybe we will see a clamshell 2DS or maybe they will go ahead and release a new handheld.

Nintendo doesn't like paying royalties, it's the reason you can't play CD/DVD/Blu Rays on your Nintendo consoles.

Considering that 1.82% is so small, I highly doubt this will stop Nintendo from making 3DS handhelds.

At least in the US, regular 3DS's sell for 169.99. Granted part of that is retail markup. Let's say Nintendo makes 100 dollars off every regular 3DS. That is 1.82 dollars that they have to pay out to this company every time. Really that is a drop in the bucket, considering anybody else in Nintendo that gets a cut from those sales, doesn't get near that percentage, so Nintendo is still making plenty of money off their 3DS. Then you got the higher priced 3DS XL.

They would have to be losing 30% or more of their profits to probably have the thought of stopping production to even enter their minds.

...and how much in royalties do you suppose Nintendo would have to pay for CD playback in the Wii or Wii U? I am betting much less and they won't even do that.

 

[BrainWalker]

Good. Anything that takes money away from Nintendo makes me happy.

Why?

Such a shame I can't just ask why. All I really want to ask is why but since I have to add more to avoid a warning....

You must really hate Nintendo, did they make your 360 red ring or something? Did they hack Mario into your Halo game?

Well OF COURSE. Anyone who doesn't like Nintendo is a Halo-loving frat boy! While we're at it, you could ask if they made me spill Mtn Dew on a 360. And I don't even own a 360.

Yeah, I don't like Nintendo. They are hugely overrated.

No, you much more than "dislike" Nintendo. I don't like grapefruit, but I don't hope the harsh winter cuts into the grapefruit harvest and hurts the grapefruit farmers or whatever. No, when you wish harm on someone or something, you've crossed the line from dislike over into hate territory. Yeah, you can definitely argue that Nintendo is overrated, but how does that equate to you being happy that they got screwed in a frivolous lawsuit? That's just petty.

How does someone who identifies with a character from Sonic the Hedgehog hate Nintendo, anyway? Nintendo and Sega are pretty similar companies.

 

[Shamanic Rhythm]

I don't.....I don't understand this. A US judge decided this. A Japanese company that used unlicensed tech from another Japanese company....why is this not being dealt with in-country? I'm not being all "Oh, america needs to fuck off and stop oplicing the world and other such nonsense". I genuinely don't know and want to.

They probably set it up so it would be held in California, Texas, or Washington as they are notorious for favouring patent holders (and companies in General). You'll often find that EULAs stipulate you agree to do court in one of these three places as well, as the judges will almost always uphold the EULA.

And if you think it's bad enough when corporations go 'court shopping' in their attempts to sabotage one another, wait until the US gets everyone to sign up to Investor-State Dispute Settlements. Because then they'll be dragging governments and consumer rights organisations towards whatever court supports their right to make a profit over any other concerns.

Seriously, corporations are well on their way towards having more rights than the average individual.

 

[Church185]

If you read the patent, it's about using 3D cameras to determine user location, and adjusting 3D display accordingly. Notably, the 3DS doesn't even do this. I can't believe Tomita won this.

P.S. Thanks

Considering the 3D cameras point away from the user while playing, I'm assuming they are talking about the technology that makes Faceraiders, the VR card minigames and Pokemon Dream Radar function. The cameras see what you are looking at with the 3DS, and it moves stuff around on screen based on your movements. This seems to fit perfectly with that description. Patent law still needs to be changed, but I think this might be the reason why Tomita won.

quoting for clarity

quoting for clarity

quoting for clarity

quoting for clarity

Sorry to everyone I quoted above, I thought you should see my response to Covarr for a different perspective.

 

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

No, you much more than "dislike" Nintendo. I don't like grapefruit, but I don't hope the harsh winter cuts into the grapefruit harvest and hurts the grapefruit farmers or whatever. No, when you wish harm on someone or something, you've crossed the line from dislike over into hate territory. Yeah, you can definitely argue that Nintendo is overrated, but how does that equate to you being happy that they got screwed in a frivolous lawsuit? That's just petty.

How does someone who identifies with a character from Sonic the Hedgehog hate Nintendo, anyway? Nintendo and Sega are pretty similar companies.

I never HAVE understood the sheer vindictive hatred some people have towards Nintendo. Anger towards some companies is understandable (like DRM schemes, exploitative DLC, manipulatively hyped titles, etc), but what exactly has Nintendo done to earn people's ire? Is it the Wii? Seriously, if people still haven't gotten over that in the past SEVEN YEARS, then the problem lies with THEM, not Nintendo. Catering to the casual crowd? Thing is, that label is a complete misnomer. The broader market has ALWAYS existed and to not cater to it in some way is financial suicide in any industry. Heck, Sony did the same thing back during the Playstation and PS2 and nobody calls them out on it. Can someone SERIOUSLY find any logical explanation for this contempt towards Nintendo? Because to me all I see is a bunch of hissy fits for Nintendo being SUCCESSFUL and not pandering towards an ever-shrinking demographic that other companies do all the time.

 

[Eldritch Warlord]

If you read the patent, it's about using 3D cameras to determine user location, and adjusting 3D display accordingly. Notably, the 3DS doesn't even do this. I can't believe Tomita won this.

P.S. Thanks

I might be off in this but in the Ocarina of Time remake, you can aim/look around using the cameras on the back of the display. Could the patent be interpreted to mean something like this?

Unless it's about looking at the user, and changing the angle of the screens to sustain the 3d illusion at different distances/angles. That, the 3DS definitely doesn't do.

...Or am I off on both accounts?

Ocarina of Time 3D uses a gyroscope for that, not the cameras. The actual patent in question is:

A stereoscopic video image pick-up and display system having a stereoscopic video image pick-up device including two video image pick-ups for outputting video information from the pick-ups; a stereoscopic video image display device for displaying different video images; and a medium for transmitting the video image information from the stereoscopic video image pick-up device to the stereoscopic video image display device. The stereoscopic video image pick-up device includes a cross-point measuring device for measuring CP information on the cross-point (CP) of optical axes of pick-ups and outputs information including the CP information and video image information to the medium. The stereoscopic video image display device includes an offset presetting device for offsetting and displaying different video images based upon the video image information, the cross-point information and information on the size of the image which is displayed by the stereoscopic video image display device.

That's pretty hard to parse (by intent I'm sure) but basically it describes a device which can record and display stereoscopic video. The full patent is more specific than that though, describing various controls and capabilities which the device could have, one of which is using cameras (or SONAR, which I think is hilarious) to determine what to set the "cross-point" at. That's not the basis for the lawsuit however, it was allowed on the basis that the depth-slider on the 3DS constitutes a "physical control which adjusts the cross-point" in that it allows you to turn off the 3D entirely (which is mathematically equivalent to setting the cross-point at an infinite distance).

 

[-Dragmire-]

If you read the patent, it's about using 3D cameras to determine user location, and adjusting 3D display accordingly. Notably, the 3DS doesn't even do this. I can't believe Tomita won this.

P.S. Thanks

I might be off in this but in the Ocarina of Time remake, you can aim/look around using the cameras on the back of the display. Could the patent be interpreted to mean something like this?

Unless it's about looking at the user, and changing the angle of the screens to sustain the 3d illusion at different distances/angles. That, the 3DS definitely doesn't do.

...Or am I off on both accounts?

Ocarina of Time 3D uses a gyroscope for that, not the cameras.

Ah, my mistake then. I just assumed it was the cameras at work when playing the game.

The actual patent in question is:

A stereoscopic video image pick-up and display system having a stereoscopic video image pick-up device including two video image pick-ups for outputting video information from the pick-ups; a stereoscopic video image display device for displaying different video images; and a medium for transmitting the video image information from the stereoscopic video image pick-up device to the stereoscopic video image display device. The stereoscopic video image pick-up device includes a cross-point measuring device for measuring CP information on the cross-point (CP) of optical axes of pick-ups and outputs information including the CP information and video image information to the medium. The stereoscopic video image display device includes an offset presetting device for offsetting and displaying different video images based upon the video image information, the cross-point information and information on the size of the image which is displayed by the stereoscopic video image display device.

That's pretty hard to parse (by intent I'm sure) but basically it describes a device which can record and display stereoscopic video. The full patent is more specific than that though, describing various controls and capabilities which the device could have, one of which is using cameras (or SONAR, which I think is hilarious) to determine what to set the "cross-point" at. That's not the basis for the lawsuit however, it was allowed on the basis that the depth-slider on the 3DS constitutes a "physical control which adjusts the cross-point" in that it allows you to turn off the 3D entirely (which is mathematically equivalent to setting the cross-point at an infinite distance).

Holy crap, I agree that patent description is very hard to read!

 

[Roxas1359]

...and how much in royalties do you suppose Nintendo would have to pay for CD playback in the Wii or Wii U? I am betting much less and they won't even do that.

They don't have to, they developed the CD technology back with the GameCube and have been slightly modifying it since then. I know that this sucks, but it feels like you are grasping for straws with this one. The patent system is abused now, but it doesn't mean the patent system was always bad. Look at Church185's post and you can see why the patent was more than likely successful in the lawsuit. It is terrible that Nintendo lost this suit, and it makes me wish that the old way of how patents were done come back, but the examples you're using to try and show how broken the system is don't really hold up because in Nintendo's case they've only developed 1 disc drive ever, the Nintendo Optical Disc Drive, and have been slightly modifying it over the course of the last 3 consoles. That's why the Wii can read GameCube discs, and the Wii U can read Wii discs, hell the Wii U can actually read GameCube discs as well, but Nintendo blocked them because they're probably gonna do what Sony does with Playstation Classics.

The patent system was initially created to encourage innovation.

Unfortunately, when we removed the requirement to provide a physical implementation of the patent in question, we turned it into a way to encourage profiteering on other people's innovations.

Yay, someone who knows what patents were originally designed for.
*hugs*

 

[WeepingAngels]

...and how much in royalties do you suppose Nintendo would have to pay for CD playback in the Wii or Wii U? I am betting much less and they won't even do that.

They don't have to, they developed the CD technology back with the GameCube and have been slightly modifying it since then.

When I said CD playback, I meant AUDIO CD playback. I thought everyone knew what CD playback meant.

BTW, Gamecube used mini DVD's.

Nintendo goes out of it's way to avoid paying royalties, it's why you can't play an AUDIO CD, DVD or BLU RAY in any Nintendo console.

ETA: oops, better clarify. I am referring to DVD Video and Blu Ray Video playback.

 

[Roxas1359]

When I said CD playback, I meant AUDIO CD playback. I thought everyone knew what CD playback meant.

BTW, Gamecube used mini DVD's.

Nintendo goes out of it's way to avoid paying royalties, it's why you can't play an AUDIO CD, DVD or BLU RAY in any Nintendo console.

Actually the Panasonic Q can. As part of the licensing agreement with Nintendo, Panasonic was allowed to build their own version of the GameCube, and the result of it was the Panasonic Q.
The GameQ, as it was known, was capable of audio playback, DVD playablility, as well as still being a GameCube with it's own GameBoy Player. In the back of it it included a port for an optical audio cable to enable 5.1 surround sound, the regular GameCube composite port, and the digital port for the rare GameCube component cables. The system also included an LED display on the front to show what was playing. The only reason it failed was because the system was way too expensive, so it was discontinued in 2003 after being on the market for 2 years. There were two models, a region locked one, and a region free one. The region locked one was $439 and the region free one was $499. The GameQ also had a pretty cool design and chrome plating finsih on it. It's a really good collector's item, and I really want one. >.<

As for the Nintendo Optical Discs, they are modeled after mini-DVDs but they are in their own way an entirely different thing. The Nintendo optical discs are highly modified so that they will only work on Nintendo Optical Drives and since then Panasonic have been the ones who have made a modified Nintendo Optical Disc for each of Nintendo's systems, while the Drive has only been slightly updated. The Wii's is a modified DVD disc, and the Wii U's is a modified Bluray disc.