I don't think a lawsuit can actually be placed until they know the specs of the actual piece. hence why nothing has probably been filed YET. Though I am sure the announcement way back when put the Lawyers on the edge of their seat.
Ye, that might be, that it isnt possible to place a lawsuit until the full specs of a product is known. I also think that some lawyers were quick to look into the similarities between the Sony's PS3 motion controller and the Wii controller and to see if they could place a lawsuit or not indeed.
Originally posted by: Brion Sohn
I am not sure what can be patendable.. I know that there are Mechanical Patend's that would be the Development and Production of the part (ie this cannot be copied). Then there are Use and Design Patends which are more vague and require more proof of infringement. These are the ones that take years to figure out as the technology may be similar but the use is the same and they look similar..
Ye, if Nintendo sues Sony over the similar motion controls, i guess that it can take years to fight this in court
Originally posted by: Brion Sohn
You cannot patend the standing in front of a to to control a game but, you can argue that doing it with a stick style controller in hand is proprietary to Nintendo.. Just as the pressure mat control is to Banda/Nintendo. Now if Sony did it all by motion capture then it might be different. Though I am sure that Sony would be paying someone else for that as well since there is probably some special effects place that has that patend.
It all gets really complex in the who developed the idea first realm..
Brion
Ye, i was thinking if it is possible to patent playing games infront of a TV with the use of a camera, similar to if it is possible to patent for example using a stick style controller and/or a pressure mat infront of the TV when playing games as you mentioned
But in som cases i actually hope that patents like this isnt possible because i think that it might stall improvements etc. For example, if Sony were the only company that were allowed to make cameras for consoles that you used to play games with, then maybe Microsoft wouldnt have been allowed to make Natal. Natal looks more advanced/improved compared to Sony's EyeToy and PS Eye.
Maybe Sony would have made something similar to Natal at some point, so it might not be that improvement would have been stopped completely, but this is just a maybe. Maybe we would have to wait a few years to see this if Sony made it instead, but now that Microsoft is making it, we get to see this product sooner. I dont mean to say that Sony is slow just to underline that, i just mean that if one company should have to come up with all ideas, then it might have taken a longer time before we might have seen a product compared to if 5 companies were trying to come up with new ideas.
In this case, Microsoft came up with the idea for Natal before Sony, and since there doesnt seem to be any patents around that only one company is allowed to develope a camera for for example gaming use, then Microsoft could make Natal now, which means that improvements might be done quicker compared to if only one company were allowed to make such a product.
It is also the same with Sony's PS3 motion control, at least Sony claims that their motion control is/will be the most precise motion control on the market. If Nintendo was the only company that was allowed to make motion controls that you hold in your hands, then other companies like Sony probably couldnt have made motion controls as well.
I can however see why some companies want patents on stuff like this. For example, when a company makes something rather unique (like for example Nintendo made the Wii controller), i can then see that they dont want many other companies making something similar, because then their product isnt that unique anymore.
Originally posted by: Brion Sohn
Just a side note.. Did you know that Ford and Toyota Hybrids are basically of the same design, they use different software but physically they are close.. as they were being developed separately they realized that both were using technology that was virtually the same (but not). So someone who was brilliant stepped in and came up with a deal to share information so that BOTH companies could avoid having to take each other to court over the intricacies of the systems. This doesn't happen too often though.. most wait for the other company to come out with something and then go after then to disrupt it.
That is pretty cool i must say! That they share/shared information like this
Originally posted by: Brion Sohn
Now if Nintendo is actually licensing the technology from someone else (which they may be doing for the "plus" accessory from what I read a while ago) of which we don't know then all this would be mute as they would not have any proprietary use or tech.
Brion
That might be indeed, that Nintendo is licensing the technology (or at least some of the technology) that they use in their Wii controller from someone else as you say. I think that both Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony license the controller rumbling technology at least, because i Sony didnt include rumbling in the PS3 controller to begin with. I think the reason for this was because of a lawsuit, which made me belive that neither Microsoft, Nintendo or Sony owns the right to the controller rumbling technology. I dont know if Nintendo themself invented all the technology that the Wii controller uses, so maybe the license some of this technology, but i have no idea.
Yea from what i know the mechanical patents are pretty easy to enforce, but design/Use stuff is not.. A Design/Use patent covers the look of the product and the manner in which the technology is used in that product. This is why these lawsuits take so long to iron out as it is not exactly cut and dry like an engineering patent as the tech can be slightly different but it can still infringe on things.. What more often than not happens is they come up with some sort of royalty arrangement + cash to cover it if it is not something specific to a product that one company wants to keep for themselves.
Comments
I don't think a lawsuit can actually be placed until they know the specs of the actual piece. hence why nothing has probably been filed YET. Though I am sure the announcement way back when put the Lawyers on the edge of their seat.
Ye, that might be, that it isnt possible to place a lawsuit until the full specs of a product is known. I also think that some lawyers were quick to look into the similarities between the Sony's PS3 motion controller and the Wii controller and to see if they could place a lawsuit or not indeed.
Ye, if Nintendo sues Sony over the similar motion controls, i guess that it can take years to fight this in court
Ye, i was thinking if it is possible to patent playing games infront of a TV with the use of a camera, similar to if it is possible to patent for example using a stick style controller and/or a pressure mat infront of the TV when playing games as you mentioned
But in som cases i actually hope that patents like this isnt possible because i think that it might stall improvements etc. For example, if Sony were the only company that were allowed to make cameras for consoles that you used to play games with, then maybe Microsoft wouldnt have been allowed to make Natal. Natal looks more advanced/improved compared to Sony's EyeToy and PS Eye.
Maybe Sony would have made something similar to Natal at some point, so it might not be that improvement would have been stopped completely, but this is just a maybe. Maybe we would have to wait a few years to see this if Sony made it instead, but now that Microsoft is making it, we get to see this product sooner. I dont mean to say that Sony is slow just to underline that, i just mean that if one company should have to come up with all ideas, then it might have taken a longer time before we might have seen a product compared to if 5 companies were trying to come up with new ideas.
In this case, Microsoft came up with the idea for Natal before Sony, and since there doesnt seem to be any patents around that only one company is allowed to develope a camera for for example gaming use, then Microsoft could make Natal now, which means that improvements might be done quicker compared to if only one company were allowed to make such a product.
It is also the same with Sony's PS3 motion control, at least Sony claims that their motion control is/will be the most precise motion control on the market. If Nintendo was the only company that was allowed to make motion controls that you hold in your hands, then other companies like Sony probably couldnt have made motion controls as well.
I can however see why some companies want patents on stuff like this. For example, when a company makes something rather unique (like for example Nintendo made the Wii controller), i can then see that they dont want many other companies making something similar, because then their product isnt that unique anymore.
That is pretty cool i must say!
That they share/shared information like this 
That might be indeed, that Nintendo is licensing the technology (or at least some of the technology) that they use in their Wii controller from someone else as you say. I think that both Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony license the controller rumbling technology at least, because i Sony didnt include rumbling in the PS3 controller to begin with. I think the reason for this was because of a lawsuit, which made me belive that neither Microsoft, Nintendo or Sony owns the right to the controller rumbling technology. I dont know if Nintendo themself invented all the technology that the Wii controller uses, so maybe the license some of this technology, but i have no idea.