Ongoing Nintendo 3DS Patent Rate Set for Tomita - 1.82% of Each Console Sold

By Jorge Ba-oh 06.01.2014 16

Ongoing Nintendo 3DS Patent Rate Set for Tomita - 1.82% of Each Console Sold on Nintendo gaming news, videos and discussion

The ongoing amount Nintendo have to pay out to the 3DS technology patent holder Tomita Technologies was set by a US judge last month.

The company lost the Nintendo 3DS lawsuit, which stated that the hardware uses the patented glasses-free technology developed by Seijiro Tomita, last year. The initial $30.2 million cost for the patent infringement had been cut in half to $15.1 million. Going forward, the ruling states that Nintendo must pay Tomita 1.82% of the wholesale price of each Nintendo 3DS and 3DS XL console sold.

Nintendo has to also shell out $241,231 in supplemental damages and prejudgment interest.

What do you think of the ruling and infringement rate?

Comment on this article

You can comment as a guest or join the Cubed3 community below: Sign Up for Free Account Login

Preview PostPreview Post Your Name:
Validate your comment
  Enter the letters in the image to validate your comment.
Submit Post

Comments

ALAX (guest) 06.01.2014#1

I think it was a cheap shot by someone who use to work from Sony. After all, didn't Sony copy Nintendo since the first Playstation?

dynosore (guest) 06.01.2014#2

ALAX (guest) said:
I think it was a cheap shot by someone who use to work from Sony. After all, didn't Sony copy Nintendo since the first Playstation?

Yes, you are obviously 100% correct about that *eye roll*

ALAX (guest) said:
I think it was a cheap shot by someone who use to work from Sony. After all, didn't Sony copy Nintendo since the first Playstation?

No, as a big Nintendo fan, I can tell you they didn't copied Nintendo. The Playstation and the Nintendo 64 were VERY different consoles, so were their games.

So, this means that Nintendo knowingly looked at the technology and  decided to use it witout paying for it. Then they got sued and the judge ruled Nintendo copied intellectual property without crediting or compensating the original developer. In other words, Nintendo pirated software, then used expensive lawyers to intimidate  the original inventor into either giving up or settle.

Isn't this all a bit hypocritical? Condemning consumers for pirating a couple of games, supporting draconian anti piracy laws(SOPA/PIPA) in the USA - then stealing other peoples ideas and hoping no one notices. Sounds like a bunch of nasty bullies to me, for shame... Smilie

, said:
So, this means that Nintendo knowingly looked at the technology and  decided to use it witout paying for it. Then they got sued and the judge ruled Nintendo copied intellectual property without crediting or compensating the original developer. In other words, Nintendo pirated software, then used expensive lawyers to intimidate  the original inventor into either giving up or settle.

Isn't this all a bit hypocritical? Condemning consumers for pirating a couple of games, supporting draconian anti piracy laws(SOPA/PIPA) in the USA - then stealing other peoples ideas and hoping no one notices. Sounds like a bunch of nasty bullies to me, for shame... Smilie

I think you're mischaracterizing things a little bit. Nintendo doesn't even make the 3DS screen, Sharp does. Also, "3D without glasses" is an extremely general idea, and I'm surprised it's one that could even be patented. Pretty much everybody who has ever put on 3D glasses has thought "wouldn't it be great if we could get 3D without the glasses?"

It looks more like a patent troll won the lawsuit on a technicality (hence why the judge cut Nintendo's penalty in half). Also, the case is still ongoing, as Nintendo plans to appeal the decision.

This site (http://www.m-cam.com/patently-obvious/intellectual-property-analysis-tomita-technologies-us-patent-no-7417664), was able to find many patents describing the same thing that pre-date Tomita's patent, so I wouldn't be surprised if Nintendo wins the appeal.

NNID: crackedthesky
My blog, mostly about writing: http://www.davidjlovato.com
Darkflame (guest) 06.01.2014#6

This confuse's me a bit, because Nintendo is only using Sharp's technology.
And, indeed, I have seen crude versions of the 3DS's screen *decades* before it came out on specialist laptops.
Surely its Nintendo's screen supplier...Sharp...which should have been sued? 

If you buy a product from a supplier do you have to personally check it isnt copied from someone else :?
Surely thats the suppliers job, not yours.

Reiji said:
ALAX (guest) said:
I think it was a cheap shot by someone who use to work from Sony. After all, didn't Sony copy Nintendo since the first Playstation?

No, as a big Nintendo fan, I can tell you they didn't copied Nintendo. The Playstation and the Nintendo 64 were VERY different consoles, so were their games.

Actually, the true story is that Nintendo formed a partnership with Sony and commissioned them to create a CD drive add on for the SNES. However, there were some complications with licensing agreements and the SNES CD-ROM add on never surfaced. Instead Sony went on to create its own standalone console - the PlayStation - to compete with the Nintendo 64.

So, the PlayStation was originally planned as an add on for Nintendo's 16-bit console, before that idea was dropped and Sony made it their own thing. Whether Sony "stole" from Nintendo or "copied" them is a matter of personal opinion. Sony have copied a few ideas from Nintendo, but I could say the same about other companies who are in competition with each other.

, said:
So, this means that Nintendo knowingly looked at the technology and  decided to use it witout paying for it. Then they got sued and the judge ruled Nintendo copied intellectual property without crediting or compensating the original developer. In other words, Nintendo pirated software, then used expensive lawyers to intimidate  the original inventor into either giving up or settle.

Isn't this all a bit hypocritical? Condemning consumers for pirating a couple of games, supporting draconian anti piracy laws(SOPA/PIPA) in the USA - then stealing other peoples ideas and hoping no one notices. Sounds like a bunch of nasty bullies to me, for shame... Smilie

Well, a judge thinks Nintendo stole ideas anyway. Maybe they didn't. Patent laws are pretty screwy right now, though. Anytime someone halfway large like releases a new thing, they'll probably be sued dozens of times by various people. The smaller guys usually lose, but I guess one of them is bound to stick occasionally. 

That said, I don't know the details of the case. If a large company blatantly stole an idea from a smaller one, I'm not surprised. If a small company is going after easy money from a larger one, also not surprised.

Also, for what it's worth, I think this case involves 3D camera technology, not the screen.

TAG: That American Guy

"If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone." Romans 12:18

Mush said:
Sony have copied a few ideas from Nintendo, but I could say the same about other companies who are in competition with each other.

Exactly. And honestly, copying the little things is good for the industry. Nintendo's Wii Remote was imperfect, but a huge step forward in technology. Sony was able to take that concept and push it forward, and came up with the Playstation Move, which was smaller and more accurate. After that, Nintendo pushed forward and included MotionPlus without changing the size of their controller.

Another example is streaming game audio through the controller. Nintendo implemented this in the Wii U GamePad, and then Sony did the same with the PS4 controller, and I'm glad. It's one of my favorite gaming features, and a must-have for anyone who plays video games in a space they share with other people. And then Microsoft and Nintendo both shifting to Blu-Ray technology is a massive improvement, because now discs hold 50 GB instead of 8.

And if Nintendo wanted, they could probably sue Microsoft and Sony for using D-Pads (and in turn, Sony could probably sue Nintendo for implementing a generic version of Blu-Ray). I think when you're in the tech business and are serious, you have to expect that some parts or ideas or features are going to be lifted by your competitors. You can't just slap a copyright on every little brain fart you have and then freak out when someone actually builds the thing ten years after you've done absolutely nothing with it. That's why the lawsuit against Nintendo regarding their controllers was overturned, and it's why the 3DS lawsuit will probably be overturned as well.

NNID: crackedthesky
My blog, mostly about writing: http://www.davidjlovato.com
Adam (guest) 06.01.2014#10

Media coverage of this patent dispute is very, very slack. The only thing that Tomita's patent really covers is the the 3DS's dual camera, 3D capturing, and "augmented reality" abilities. They have no claims on the screen at all which is, as others have pointed out, Sharp's tech.

Darkflame (guest) 07.01.2014#11

Adam (guest) said:
Media coverage of this patent dispute is very, very slack. The only thing that Tomita's patent really covers is the the 3DS's dual camera, 3D capturing, and "augmented reality" abilities. They have no claims on the screen at all which is, as others have pointed out, Sharp's tech.

Fair enough.....but that's even more strange as nothing the Nintendo does in those areas is unique to the system.
Hell, having two cameras is the only way to do 3d video...its how our eyes work. And Augmented Reality is a technique known for half a century now.
Unless they are claiming specific marker-recognition algorithms theres nothing about AR anyone should own.


ALAX (guest) said:
I think it was a cheap shot by someone who use to work from Sony. After all, didn't Sony copy Nintendo since the first Playstation?

Nintendo Fanboy Logic

AntiNintendo said:
ALAX (guest) said:
didn't Sony copy Nintendo since the first Playstation?

Nintendo Fanboy Logic

Except Sony did take the CD-ROM add-on that they developed with Nintendo for the SNES and turned it into the Playstation. The Playstation was born from Nintendo.

Sonic_13 said:
AntiNintendo said:
ALAX (guest) said:
didn't Sony copy Nintendo since the first Playstation?

Nintendo Fanboy Logic

Except Sony did take the CD-ROM add-on that they developed with Nintendo for the SNES and turned it into the Playstation. The Playstation was born from Nintendo.

Yes, and your father took your mother that was developed in cooperation by his father and mother in law, which resulted in you. And then you posted this comment. Do you think your grandfather should get credit for the homework you do after school?

, said:
Sonic_13 said:
AntiNintendo said:
ALAX (guest) said:
didn't Sony copy Nintendo since the first Playstation?

Nintendo Fanboy Logic

Except Sony did take the CD-ROM add-on that they developed with Nintendo for the SNES and turned it into the Playstation. The Playstation was born from Nintendo.

Yes, and your father took your mother that was developed in cooperation by his father and mother in law, which resulted in you. And then you posted this comment. Do you think your grandfather should get credit for the homework you do after school?


If a guy born 2000 years ago can receive the punishment for my sins, I'm sure a guy born 50 years ago can take the credit for my homework. Smilie

Aw Im sure your homework is real nice! But I agree to punish the sins on that guy, if only for the convenience. Smilie

Subscribe to this topic Subscribe to this topic

If you are a registered member and logged in, you can also subscribe to topics by email.
Sign up today for blogs, games collections, reader reviews and much more
Site Feed
Who's Online?
Gabriel PVJ Jones, Ofisil

There are 2 members online at the moment.