it may already have been talked about yet what do you think of the lawsuit?

#51LightHawKnightPosted 7/17/2011 7:09:29 PM

From: TIGERPOKEMON | #061
But didn't Nintendo just buy the screens from Shap or some other company?


I thought it was sharp or something.

---
"You're in America now, Our idea of diplomacy is showing up with a gun in one hand and a sandwich in the other and asking which you'd prefer."
#52Baha05Posted 7/17/2011 7:34:46 PM
So really in that case they should sue both companies, but why not sue Sharp when you can just sue Nintendo for more bang for your buck?
#53VyersPosted 7/17/2011 7:45:05 PM
darkqueenhelba posted...
No, I'm not saying that at all. But why patent first and create second? It should be the other way around. If you care that much about the integrity of your idea and the possibilities they might bring, you won't divulge them easily. If he was actually in the middle of such a project and then patented it, I could understand. But patenting an idea with little to no base screams squatter. It's not like like I'm vilifying him just because he sued Nintendo. They get sued all the time. And cases like this are made almost everyday. I hate the type of guy/gal he represents. That's what I hate. If it wasn't so easy to spot I wouldn't even feel the need to go into discussion about it. The fact that people are hesitant about what actually transpired is what is off-putting.

Scenario: You make something

Someone patents the idea before you can patent it

You are screwed.

This guy did EXACTLY what Nintendo does. Nintendo NEVER creates something before patenting it. Nintendo has likely sat on a number of patents for years. The man licenses the idea to other companies, which means that he IS doing something with the technology.
---
Playing: Shin Megami Tensei: Strange Journey, The Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening, Stacking, The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time 3D, inFamous
#54LightHawKnightPosted 7/17/2011 8:04:19 PM
And I have to ask is Sprint getting sued as well?

---
"You're in America now, Our idea of diplomacy is showing up with a gun in one hand and a sandwich in the other and asking which you'd prefer."
#55Baha05Posted 7/17/2011 8:52:42 PM
Name some companies he has sold the use of the patent to. I'm curious now
#56LightHawKnightPosted 7/18/2011 2:00:11 PM
So no one knows if Sprint is getting sued as well?

---
"You're in America now, Our idea of diplomacy is showing up with a gun in one hand and a sandwich in the other and asking which you'd prefer."
#57FAT____MANPosted 7/18/2011 2:15:16 PM
Vyers posted...
darkqueenhelba posted...
No, I'm not saying that at all. But why patent first and create second? It should be the other way around. If you care that much about the integrity of your idea and the possibilities they might bring, you won't divulge them easily. If he was actually in the middle of such a project and then patented it, I could understand. But patenting an idea with little to no base screams squatter. It's not like like I'm vilifying him just because he sued Nintendo. They get sued all the time. And cases like this are made almost everyday. I hate the type of guy/gal he represents. That's what I hate. If it wasn't so easy to spot I wouldn't even feel the need to go into discussion about it. The fact that people are hesitant about what actually transpired is what is off-putting.

Scenario: You make something

Someone patents the idea before you can patent it

You are screwed.

This guy did EXACTLY what Nintendo does. Nintendo NEVER creates something before patenting it. Nintendo has likely sat on a number of patents for years. The man licenses the idea to other companies, which means that he IS doing something with the technology.

I'd like to see a product that has come from his patent, to one of the licenses he's given out. If you can't show me that then SHUT THE **** UP.
---
Dr. Doom Thanos Juggernaut
All Day. Everyday.