Nintendo loses lawsuit.

#231Baha05Posted 3/14/2013 11:51:18 AM
Here is the odd thing thinking about it, this can't be the only idea patent. Isn't it possible other patents on similar yet very different methods of the Glasses-less 3D exist?
---
"I think there will be a price drop at the latest by E3. I'd even bet my account on it." Icecreamdunwich on the Wii U
#232EseenuzPosted 3/14/2013 12:13:27 PM
ORANGE666 posted...
Sharp made the screen but the way Nintendo implemented it was ultimately what infringed on the patent.

Like a previous poster stated, this was not a criminal charge.. the guy wanted compensation for his patent being used which Nintendo did not follow on.

Nintendo does not own the patent either, someone DOES own it however. If not for that guy, Nintendo would be sued eventually. Because they are using technology without a liscense for it. Sharp has a liscense to manufacture the tech, but no one has a license in how its implemented.

Nintendo argues that his case is invalid because they didn't infringe on key aspects of the patent. Terrible argument, the tech itself is the key aspect of the patent, Nintendo most likely did infringe on something in particular in the patent but none of us know what exactly it was, so there really isn't anything for us to talk about.

Nintendo infringed in a specific part of the patent that was not the screen itself that much is certain. Now they pay the price.
#233ralphlouis17Posted 3/14/2013 1:06:13 PM
OoSubaruoO posted...
Nintendo should have hired Phoenix Wright.


lol...that's what i was thinking
---
Netflix has a rental service, but it isn't a rental service.-demondog666
#234LinkSSJ6Posted 3/14/2013 1:08:06 PM
He's gonna spend it all in Nintendo games.
---
Gotta go fast!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=0CWm5zHVWaA