06-21-2014, 06:38 PM
(06-21-2014, 04:00 PM)Wastelander Wrote:(06-21-2014, 11:28 AM)Zaliphone Wrote:(06-21-2014, 11:06 AM)Wastelander Wrote:(06-21-2014, 08:21 AM)Zaliphone Wrote:(06-21-2014, 07:58 AM)Wastelander Wrote: Philips is a copyright troll that made a vague assed copyright and then enforces it against one out of three companies that used its vague assed patent. Trolllllllllll.
I agree that it's scummy, but they aren't being a patent troll. They have a legitimate patent that Nintendo is infringing. Philips spent years spending (wasting I guess, because the product never caught on) money on R&D for an IR camera device with a physical motion sensor that utilizes hand-gestures to a fixed point, which is exactly what the wiimote uses with the sensor bar. Hardly vague, definitely a justified lawsuit.
Vague, as in as broadly as humanly possible. It's like King copyrighting Candy.
It is absolutely not like that. Before Phillip's patent nothing like it existed on the market, while the word candy has been around for a long time.
It is absolutely like that in the sense that the definition in the patent is vague. Nintendo did its own thing, but Philips's patent was so vague that they can lawyer up and slap Nintendo down. Even if they have no business in doing so. Just like with Candy, where King put a copyright on the word Candy, even though a lot of companies did its own thing with it.
You can't really compare a legit patent lawsuit to something as ridiculous as copyrighting a common word.