Wii Controler ban?

Discussion in 'Electronic Games' started by toxictaipan, Jul 28, 2008.

8 league13 468 60
  1. toxictaipan

    toxictaipan New Member

    Last edited: Jul 28, 2008
  2. DarthPika

    DarthPika New Member

    Ugg why do jerks like this have to go around causing trouble... :nonono:
     
  3. toxictaipan

    toxictaipan New Member

    Money. Did you not see the $21 million lawsuit?
     
  4. DarthPika

    DarthPika New Member

    Ya, hes a jerk for that. It's a sad day when we have ppl suing left and right just to get rich quick. >.<
     
  5. toxictaipan

    toxictaipan New Member

    Yeah I know, but that's life. I just don't get what's up with it and the GameCube controler though. It should have set off a lawsuit WAY before the Wii Classic Remote was ever even invented. Now that guy's just being stingy!
     
  6. Articjedi

    Articjedi Active Member

    Guys like making up patents so they can sue anyone who actually makes a similar product for money. Yah, there oughtaa be a law against it, but there's not much we can do. I'm pretty sure nintendo is going to appeal like crazy so they can keep their controllers on the market though.
     
  7. Wow, now this is news here, there have been many tales of copyright infringement since the Wii came out....former Midway employee, and now this, I am surprised that the courts ruled against Nintendo in this case. The ban seems a bit loose and vague, so I don't see that this will hurt Wii sales much, but none the less this is still a problem for Nintendo. This is something I would like to keep tabs on.

    CMT
     
  8. toxictaipan

    toxictaipan New Member

    That's why I posted it :wink:!

    Yeah, I don't think it will hurt sales that much either. After all, you only need the Classic Controller for a few games, and none of the really popular ones (that I know of...). I really want to see how this turns out, it's interesting that, that guy just noticed the similarities of both the Classic and GameCube controllers to his design. You think he would have noticed back when the GameCube came out....
     
  9. DarthPika

    DarthPika New Member

    I agree, there should be a law against stuff like this. It doesn't help that half the judges out there seam to be complet idiots. >_>
     
  10. toxictaipan

    toxictaipan New Member

    Well, IDK about that. I mean, what if you made something and someone else copied it, and made a whole bunch more money then you? Yeah, you'd be really mad.

    But the thing I don't agree with is the objects it's over. You see, if I made a flash light that shined more then a mile and someone made another flash light just like mine and made more money then me, I could see where this stuff helps people. But we're talking about a video game controller. The controller isn't what sells the game console! I could care less if someone copied my Remotes.
     
  11. Phazon Elite

    Phazon Elite New Member

    When he was little, his momma repeatedly dropped him on his head, then his dad kicked him until he bounced sufficiently similar to a beach ball.
     
  12. Articjedi

    Articjedi Active Member

    But here's the thing. The company never actually made what they patented. They just had a design that they never used. It's like the only thing they were planning to do was wait until someone else actually made money on the product then sue them because they dropped the 10 grand on the patent before the company who actually used the product does. They never made a controller, they just had a piece of paper saying they owned the intellectual property on one.

    I mean, who deserves to make money off a product? The one who drew up some plans on a napkin then stuffed it in a file cabinet for 5 years, or the guy who actually made a working model, developed it, marketed it, producted it, then shipped and sold it to the consumers who wanted it? That's what I find sickening about these lawsuits. I'd call the entire jury incompetent =\
     
    Last edited: Jul 29, 2008
  13. master of puppets

    master of puppets New Member

    I'm sure that if you had a perfect opportunity to sue someone or a company like this to get very rich, very quickly, you would take it.
    I know that the vast majority would.
     
  14. toxictaipan

    toxictaipan New Member

    Exactly.

    And I assume you are talking to me, Phazon?
     
    Last edited: Jul 29, 2008
  15. DarthPika

    DarthPika New Member

    Yes, I probably would, but unlike this jerk, I'm not going to go out of my way to try and make lawsuits happen. :nonono:

    I was more or less talking about the kind of people who sue like that lady that WON against Mc Donalds because she got burned by hot coffey, and sued because the cup didn't warn that the drink was hot.

    BTW, she got burned because she was driving with the drink BETWEEN HER LEGS!!! Now she has a ton of money because of an idiot judge. People like that are what I was talking about.
     
  16. Well of course DarthPika, that incident was pretty much a given and of course it is complete common sense that if someone every has a cup of coffee, they can expect to get burn if they were not careful. The reason why the case went in favor of the plaintiff mainly rested on the fact that mcdonald's coffee is actually heated up more stronger than an ordinary coffee machine that we can usually purchase at the store (I believe that the majority of her burns were 2nd and 3rd degree), plus the fact that they neglected to have a warning label on the cups allow for such a case to make it through the loopholes within the system.

    The logic in this is simple although the way our legal system may appear becomes very confusing to the public sometimes, but here is how I have come to understand the outcome:

    1)consumer buys a product
    2)instructions are provided to the consumer for proper use (i.e. warning labels, manuals, etc)
    3)proper use of said product keeps consumer safe and the manufacturer is not held liable for improper use of the product.

    If the manufacturer does not provide any type of information to the consumer on their product(s) and its use, there are consequences that can go against the manufacturer/company. It may seem weird, but the woman was a consumer and was buying a product, so the fact that mcdonalds did not provide her with the proper information for her product clearly served as grounds for her lawsuit.

    The Wii controller case is completely separate, but again the idea is still the same, loopholes within the system allow for such cases to go to court, so it no surprise to me that such a case went to trial, but again I would definitely like to stay tuned to hear what happens next.

    CMT
     
  17. Jran Sakarra

    Jran Sakarra New Member

    I read that and it made perfect sense....
    You make the legal system easy.
     
  18. Mew*

    Mew* Active Member

    What goes around comes around.

    Not sure if the case is over yet, but Nintendo recently opened a case on Nyko for their wireless version of the Nunchuk saying it would confuse buyers since it so closely resembled their product in design and packaging :nonono:


    Does anybody actually know what the patent they supposedly infringed was?
     
  19. Articjedi

    Articjedi Active Member

    I thought juries decide these things, not judges.
     
  20. toxictaipan

    toxictaipan New Member

    I still can't believe that. If you don't have enough common sense to know coffee is hot and that you shouldn't put it between your legs while DRIVING, you shouldn't be allowed to buy coffee anyway. Driving is a privilege, and obviously hot coffee should be too.

    "With great power comes great [del]responsibility[/del] stupidity."
     

Share This Page