Nintendo Awarded Patent for Instant Messaging 67
Zwzo writes "Nintendo has been awarded a patent for a video game messaging service that utilizes a buddy list and can display information about game activities and user status." From the article: "Initially filed in 2000, a year before the release of Microsoft's Xbox and two years before the official launch of Microsoft's Xbox Live Internet service, Nintendo's patent is relatively broad and could potentially lead to litigation against other major players in the game console market. Although the text of the patent itself refers to the Nintendo64 and Game Boy Color by name, some have speculated that this patent could portend an instant messaging system for the Wii."
Moving on ... (Score:3)
Re:Moving on ... (Score:5, Funny)
Yup. Althought in this case, isn't the animal in question is more like a patent wiisel than a troll?
Re:Moving on ... (Score:2, Insightful)
Defensive patents, preventing competitors from patenting it. They also allow a MAD policy for patents, "sue me and I'll sue you".
but (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:but (Score:2)
Re:but (Score:1)
Re:but (Score:3, Insightful)
In common English usage, it is.
Re:but (Score:2)
Re:but (Score:1)
Re:but (Score:1)
Re:but (Score:1)
Re:but (Score:2)
As a rule, bigger companies with actual products DO file it for defence means. But top management changes, times change, it's not out of the question that should they become really desperate and profits quickly dropping into losses... they could start suing everybody.
Don't forget it's a company, not a man. A single man has certain principles or other
Dreamcast (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:mehb (Score:1)
Re:A little ridiculous (Score:5, Funny)
That would be ok, no other console producing company seems interested in this invention.
Re:A little ridiculous (Score:1)
Re:A little ridiculous (Score:5, Informative)
According to the summary the Nintendo patient was filed in 2000. The first public release of Steam was in 2002. I'm not sure exactly when messaging was added to steam, but it wasn't in the first release, so that is over two years between Nintendo's patient and Valve having such a feature (at least claiming to have such a feature, I sure as hell have never gotten it to work).
Re:A little ridiculous (Score:1)
Re:A little ridiculous (Score:1)
Groan. (Score:1, Troll)
Re:Groan. (Score:5, Informative)
It's also specifically geared for consoles, so even stuff like X-fire wouldn't fall under it.
X-box live is really the only similar thing, and the patent was actually filed for 2 years before Live's official release.
Finally, when has the US Patent Office really cared about prior art?
Re:Groan. (Score:2)
OK, I get it.
So now, instead of saying, "Hey look, I'm doing something that could always be done in the real world, but WITH A COMPUTER! Give me my patent!"...
They'll start saying "Hey look, I'm doing something that's been done many times before on a computer, but WITH A CONSOLE! Give me my patent!"
How long 'till Microsoft gets the one-click patent for buying addons to Oblivion *ON A CONSOLE*?
Re:Groan. (Score:3, Funny)
I'm guessing that it isn't long before Microsoft patents one-click buying of stuff *ON THE WII*.
That would show Nintendo.
The only similar thing? (Score:2)
Re:Groan. (Score:2)
Re:Groan. (Score:1)
PIN Number
ATM Machine
Sorry, it's kind of a muscle reflex.
Re:Groan. (Score:2)
I've always wondered about exactly what constitutes "prior art" (in the legal sense).
For instance, their patent claims state that their invention is a system comprising of a web server and a video game console. Does something like AOL's instant messaging system constitute prior art for that, le
Preventative measures (Score:1)
This is a really stupid article. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:This is a really stupid article. (Score:2)
Yes there are BAD patents, but then there are tons and tons of valid patents, and this seems to be just another valid one, and one that hasn't seen a lick of activity in 6 years.
Perhaps in this case a better analogy would be guns. Good in the hands of hunters and normal folk, but bad in the hands of others.
Nothing is stupider than slashdot analogies. (Score:4, Insightful)
A better analogy might be this: You find out that the hungarian army has weapons.
Holy crud! The Hungarian army has weapons? They could use those weapons to kill us!
Except wait, a couple of questions immediately come to mind.
But the Hungarian army having stun tazers? Wait, why is this supposed to be interesting again? Similarly, why should it make a difference that Nintendo (a company with no history of patent abuse or even patent enforcement really) obtained a specific patent on a specific instant messaging system that they designed for a product six years ago and then never sold?
The Hungarian army stockpiles weapons but never does anything with them. Nintendo stockpiles patents but never does anything with them. The world is a dangerous place but we survive anyway. Deal.
Re:Interesting... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Interesting... (Score:2)
Re:Interesting... (Score:2)
Keyboard? or VOIP Wiimote? (Score:1)
Re:Keyboard? or VOIP Wiimote? (Score:2)
Re:Keyboard? or VOIP Wiimote? (Score:3, Informative)
Personally, I wouldn't be suprised if things involved the DS connectivity at some point as well, maybe letting you use the DS touchscreen along with handwriting recognition to enter text.
Re:Keyboard? or VOIP Wiimote? (Score:2, Interesting)
I am being serious, I just want to know.
Re:Keyboard? or VOIP Wiimote? (Score:2, Informative)
I messaged in warbirds in the 90's (Score:1, Interesting)
geopilot
http://www.globalboiling.com/ [globalboiling.com]
Extremely specific... but used for litigation? (Score:2)
So it applies specifically to the N64 and Game Boy Color... but it could lead to litigation?
Can someone explain to me how this isn't just Ars Technica stirring the pot?
Re:Extremely specific... but used for litigation? (Score:3, Informative)
Can someone explain to me how this isn't just Ars Technica stirring the pot?
The actual patent claims don't mention the systems by name, but the background info uses the systems as examples of systems the technology might be used in. The patent is for anything, not just those two systems.
Re:Extremely specific... but used for litigation? (Score:1)
64DD? (Score:1)
Aready knew this (Score:1)
Remember the whole Connect24 thing? Part of the announcement said that you could start up your console after it was sleeping, and you'd see the messages and gifts (ie. files) from friends which were sent to you while you were away.
I can see it now (Score:1)
WiiMan says: Gimme a sec. Lemme toss bowser at the last mine.
WiiMan says: Bummer dude. He got me. Looks like no goodnight kiss tonight.
Phsyco_gamer says: Yeah man. That Peach is hot. Wanna play Super Smash Bros. Brawl now?
Summary and Article Misleading (Score:2)
1. A messaging system comprising: a web server computer; and a video game system for executing a video game program for a video game, the video game program being embodied on a storage device replaceably connectable by
2000? And now? (Score:1)
They mentioned the GBC and N64 by name, yet I can't see any way this would be helpful for those systems...
If they were going to use this for the Wii, how would they use it? There's probably no text interface, so could it mean voice? Voice coordination is much better than text, too--to use Halo as a example, try flying a Banshee or driving a Warthog into your opponent's base and simultaneously communicate. It doesn't work.
Re:2000? And now? (Score:1)
Re:2000? And now? (Score:1)
I meant that trying to communicate through text doesn't work: in order to type, you have to hit t, then type your message, which means you can't press any keys to affect the game in the meantime.
Shocked (Score:4, Informative)
For some of the nitty gritty first, they filed a provisional application on May 31, 2000, which means they have priority to this date. It is also important to remember with the current patent laws in the US the system is based on a first to invent, which means any prior art could have to pre-date the May 31, 2000 date as well.
I have one grand problem with the arstechnica article. It is in the very end, where the author says:
Unfortunately, this does not fly in any countries patent system. This argument is good for trade secrets, where independently inventing a similar or the same item is okay. In patents, whether or not someone invented something similar while you were waiting for you patent is immaterial. Also, the application would've been published no later then May or so of 2002, meaning any technology after that date could easily see the claims and know what Nintendo was seeking a patent for.
I seriously doubt Nintendo will go sue happy with this, but they may hold onto it just in case their console market goes south like Sega's did. Remember, they wouldn't really be trolling if they actually did make a real attempt to implement a system using the patent they received.
This simply means... (Score:2)
Didn't the Atari 2600 have this? (Score:1)
Any "instant messaging" patent that post-dates the 1960s deserves a good prior art search.