Immersion Corporation have a history of taking on companies and winning, with Valve being the latest in the firing line over Immersion's patents. The patents involved are 7,336,260, 8,749,507, 9,430,042, 9,116,546, 10,627,907, 10,665,067, and 11,175,738.
They're pretty notorious for this going after Xiaomi, Meta (Facebook), Sony, Microsoft and more in the past. Most companies just seem to partner up with them now and license their stuff.
From the press release:
“Immersion and its employees have worked diligently for almost 30 years to invent innovative haptic technologies that allow people to use their sense of touch to engage with products and experience the digital world around them. Our intellectual property is relevant to many of the most important and cutting-edge ways in which haptic technology is and can be deployed, and, in the case of AR/VR experiences, haptics is crucial to an immersive user experience,” said Eric Singer, Chairman and CEO.
“While we are pleased to see that Valve recognizes the value of haptics and has adopted our haptic technology in its handheld video game and AR/VR systems as part of its effort to generate revenue streams through the sales of hardware, games and other virtual assets, and advertisements, it is important for us to protect our business against infringement of our intellectual property to preserve the investments that we have made in our technology,” added Mr. Singer. “We must ensure that our intellectual property is recognized as a necessary feature in the handheld video game and emerging AR/VR markets, even when litigation becomes necessary.”
I have reached out to Valve Press, to see if they have any statement to share on this.
Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
Some you may have missed, popular articles from the last month:
Quoting: SeegrasAnd here is a rant from 1851(!) in "The Economist"(!) that already understood why a patent system is total dreck:
https://seegras.discordia.ch/Blog/voices-against-the-patent-system-the-economist-1851/
Wow, that article is incredible. And it describes a 6 month period for patents whereby "good inventions will find a market". I feel like the whole patent trolling bullshit we see today could be solved by introducing that exact barrier. By all means patent your idea, but if no products are created for market within 6 months (either by you or others), then the patent is invalidated. Or even better, become open source, since the idea was publicly registered. You'd turn patents from a barrier into a rich source of idea generation.
Maybe 6 months is too short a period?
And I've no idea how to treat existing patents, except to arbitrarily scrapping them.
4 Likes, Who?
To add insult to injury, software is not patentable. At least half of the patents involved in that lawsuit are actually software patents.
Europe: https://new.epo.org/en/legal/epc/2020/a52.html
USA: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_patents_under_United_States_patent_law
But some fuckwits of patent lawyers argued, "algorithm" in patent law is not the same as in mathematics, and thus software -- of maths -- is patentable. Or that software was made specific to the device it ran on:
https://seegras.discordia.ch/Blog/the-moby-dick-support-device/
(this is the reasoning underlying most of the patents mentioned in this suit).
Software patents as such have never been challenged in court, but they're mostly not enforced, and the patent offices keep accepting them illegally, even if they're not enforceable.
Europe: https://new.epo.org/en/legal/epc/2020/a52.html
USA: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_patents_under_United_States_patent_law
But some fuckwits of patent lawyers argued, "algorithm" in patent law is not the same as in mathematics, and thus software -- of maths -- is patentable. Or that software was made specific to the device it ran on:
https://seegras.discordia.ch/Blog/the-moby-dick-support-device/
(this is the reasoning underlying most of the patents mentioned in this suit).
Software patents as such have never been challenged in court, but they're mostly not enforced, and the patent offices keep accepting them illegally, even if they're not enforceable.
5 Likes, Who?
I was on the brink of turning my university thesis into a business when I found there were several bs patents in the field. None of them was worth more then 20 seconds of brainstorming by a naive person. None featured an implementation. E.g. One patent was 20 pages describing that to simulate molecular genetics experiments in realtime, you need at least 2 variables. Had I read that patent earlier, developing my virtual laboratory would have been so much easier. /s
In the end, I decided, I never wanted to get in touch with this stuff, so I went on to a normal day-to-day job. Really sad. My little project might have really helped during covid.
I really hate bs patents. Software patents are always blocking progress. Engineering patents might be valid, but if a company can market they reserved double-digit numbers of patents in their new hand shaver, something has gone out of control.
I think the real problem started when countries started to show of with number of patents in their domain. There is negative incentive for quality control.
Last edited by const on 17 May 2023 at 5:04 pm UTC
In the end, I decided, I never wanted to get in touch with this stuff, so I went on to a normal day-to-day job. Really sad. My little project might have really helped during covid.
I really hate bs patents. Software patents are always blocking progress. Engineering patents might be valid, but if a company can market they reserved double-digit numbers of patents in their new hand shaver, something has gone out of control.
I think the real problem started when countries started to show of with number of patents in their domain. There is negative incentive for quality control.
Last edited by const on 17 May 2023 at 5:04 pm UTC
6 Likes, Who?
Quoting: LacSlyerparticularly in the medical field.medical? what a bunch of a** holes
Last edited by elmapul on 17 May 2023 at 5:06 pm UTC
2 Likes, Who?
ElectricPrism May 17, 2023
QuoteThe truth is stranger than fiction.
-Mark Twain
Microsoft literally funded the 20 year lawsuit against Linux through SCO to try to snuff us out.
Fuck Microsoft. They are likely at it again after the Microsoft ASUS ROG Ally
https://lwn.net/Articles/924577/
QuoteMicrosoft, which had not yet learned to love Linux, funded SCO and loudly bought licenses from the company.
9 Likes, Who?
slaapliedje May 17, 2023
Quoting: LacSlyerImmersion used to be THE company people would license their tech/API out from for forefeedback joysticks. Have you seen any forcefeedback joysticks being made in a long time? The only ones still made are the wheels, flight sticks generally don't have it anymore (with some very few and very expensive exceptions). It's solely because of these ass clowns either requiring a patent deal or suing those who don't. Not sure where the Haptics come into play, but I bet they 'think' they have rights to everything that gives any sort of feedback, like vibration motors in game pads...Quoting: MayeulCIDK. Copyright ils definitely way too long, and it's absurd that it outlasts patents.
Patents on the other hand, are quite interesting, though they have been subverted with time (as with anything when lawyers get involved). They offer companies to publish their trade secrets against time-limited exclusivity. Sounds like a good deal, as it avoids "well, that is something only company X knew how to do, but they went belly up 50 years ago" situations. Also, you need to pay (more and more with time) to extend them, up to 20 years.
I'm looking into patenting an electronics circuit myself (PhD results), which is quite innovative. If the patent sale or licensing could give me a few funds to pursue more research, I'd be happy with that. In this situation, I see the patent system as "outsourcing R&D".
I'm a bit sad that you need a lawyer to draft them up though, that makes patents expensive to do for individuals like me (yeah, patenting through my lab is... complicated, and I'm not employed anymore anyway).
Also, most companies take the approach of "describing as little as you can", which is against the spirit.
And then there's patent trolls and patents of little substance. You're not supposed to be able to patent an idea, and I believe patents to last way too long for software, where time-to-market is much, much shorter than, say, the 5-10 years it generally takes in electronics or other industrial domains (not even counting the time to obtain funding if you are starting a product from scratch as a startup).
I can't really judge for this situation, maybe their claims are legitimate? I'd have to read the
Judging from their Wikipedia page I'd wager they're patent trolls. They have tens of millions in revenue while having only 26 people employed and owning tens of thousands of patents by buying up companies, particularly in the medical field. They actually worked with Microsoft in the late 90s but the sued them in 2002... Here's the kicker. They sued based on a patent they acquired from another company in 98.
This is 100% a patent trolling company.
4 Likes, Who?
The worst part about patents is that by now, the Patents Office makes zero effort to *actually* grant valid patents, leaving the courts (aka lawyers, aka the deepest pockets win) to attribute valid and legitimate ones and troll ones.
So, a sub-strate of filthy scumbags (patent lawyers) thrives on the apathy of the aforementioned office, sucking dry innovative, but resource-strapped entities and encourage the creation of patent trolling companies.
The few, real, tangible benefits of granting commercial exclusivity to ingenous people and companies is FAR outshadowed by this disgusting by-product.
So, a sub-strate of filthy scumbags (patent lawyers) thrives on the apathy of the aforementioned office, sucking dry innovative, but resource-strapped entities and encourage the creation of patent trolling companies.
The few, real, tangible benefits of granting commercial exclusivity to ingenous people and companies is FAR outshadowed by this disgusting by-product.
7 Likes, Who?
The American Patent system: The reason nobody can ever have nice things.
3 Likes, Who?
Man, Immersion Corporation! I haven't heard that name in a while! I instantly remembered the name as being associated with patent-trolling - glad to see that I had the correct company. 
How convenient!
Last edited by Pengling on 18 May 2023 at 1:07 am UTC
Quoting: elmapulthen i think you should watch the rog ally presentation.A fellow GOL'er showed me this a couple of days ago: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/save-dollardollardollar-on-the-rog-ally-by-resetting-and-trading-in-your-steam-deck-gaming-handheld/ar-AA1b4Wka
not only they have an device to compete with the deck (an partnership with the vendors of one) but they spread FUD and miss information there.
i mean, they implied you cant do your homework on steamOS... (they said you can do it on the ally because its running windows)
implied you cant use xcloud (despite the fact that they thenselves officially support it)
implied you cant use netflix.
implied that windows is more compatible (when we know its the opposite, games that are compatible with it not the other way arround)
How convenient!
Quoting: ElectricPrismJust like netbooks all over again...QuoteThe truth is stranger than fiction.
-Mark Twain
Microsoft literally funded the 20 year lawsuit against Linux through SCO to try to snuff us out.
Fuck Microsoft. They are likely at it again after the Microsoft ASUS ROG Ally
https://lwn.net/Articles/924577/
QuoteMicrosoft, which had not yet learned to love Linux, funded SCO and loudly bought licenses from the company.
Last edited by Pengling on 18 May 2023 at 1:07 am UTC
4 Likes, Who?
Quoting: PenglingA fellow GOL'er showed me this a couple of days ago: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/save-dollardollardollar-on-the-rog-ally-by-resetting-and-trading-in-your-steam-deck-gaming-handheld/ar-AA1b4Wka
How convenient!
LOL half of me is worried that this marketing stunt can be effective, the other half cant stop laughing at how desperate microsoft is!
actually... i think im more into the laughing side.
"The Steam Deck is still quite popular and so a used Steam Deck 512GB SSD in good condition can be sold for $500 to $600 on average. Meanwhile, a 256GB Steam Deck in good condition tends to go for $400 to $450, and the 64GB Steam Deck is typically worth $350 to $400 if in good condition."
LOL they are implying you can sell it for almost as much money as you spend on a new one direct from valve!
if they truly believe that, then we can assume they are admiting that the value perception of the deck wasnt affected by the announcement of their own product.
Quoteand will be able to play Steam games as well as games on Nvidia GeForce Now, Game Pass, and more.thos *** holes are still implying you cant use GFN on a steam deck.
Last edited by elmapul on 18 May 2023 at 3:11 am UTC
4 Likes, Who?
Patreon
PayPal
See more from me