Gibson Guitars suing Activision and Harmonix for patent infringement
Sunday, March 23rd, 2008 - 9:24pm
Check this out: http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=17968
Anyone know the details of the patent in question? All the lawsuit documentation (http://blog.wired.com/games/files/gib_hmx_suit.pdf) indicates is that it is a "System And Method For Generating And Controlling A Simulated Musical Concert Experience". This seems like a fairly broad description.
I just looked it up on the US patent website.
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL...
I don't know, I'm still reading through and deciphering some of the legal nonsense, but the abstract at least specifies a 3d headset, and some other equipment. The drawing kinda makes it look like a guitar hooked up to a studio, with a computer with a 3d headset. But then I know very little about an actual studio setup.
Just out of curiosity, if Gibson had this patent in '99, why were they one of the name brands on GH from the beginning? I mean they're one of the sponsors, right?
Mex wrote:
I have a feeling that someone in either Legal Department misplaced some importalt files. Either the game makers forgot to file and get permission from Gibson(there are a long of Gisbon products in the games). Gibson does not know that they agreed to EA/Activision using their products in game. Or something else. But in the complaint Gibson is requesting a jury trial on this matter. So they obviously believe that this has cost them enough money to draw out a long court process.
As a gigantic music instrument manufacturer, Gibson may have a patent for an instrument that is basically a guitar controller.
These are the kinds of suits that keep real cars out of GTA. The licensing of these sorts of products are very sticky and risky business. Overlooking the licensing is even worse. Some may recall that NBC was sued over the Garbage Disposal scene because the corporate logo and model of drain in the sink was noticeable. The company did not like their name associated with a girl grinding her fist to nothing.
On any accord, someone, somewhere royally made a mistake and millions will be spent to get to the bottom of this.
I just read through most of the claims. I didn't see anything stating a 3D headset. But what I did garner from it is basically exactly what Guitar Hero is. Accroding to the claims, you need 4 things. Prerecorded video of a "concert" setting, prerecorded audio of a "concert" setting, a prerecorded audio of a soundtrack for a song, and a "guitar" of sorts. The device will play the "concert" video and audio normally. However, the soundtrack will be adjusted based upon how the user plays the guitar. Basically, it will not play parts of the soundtrack if the user doesn't hit the right strings of the guitar. So basically what we have here is Guitar Hero using a guitar with string rather than buttons. All in all, unless I missed something, I think Gibson has a really strong case.
Jadawin wrote:
The patent seems very clear that it's talking about using a real electric guitar with a virtual reality headset. In the last section listing the preferred embodiments, the patent even says "one advantage of this system is that no computer is needed to operate or control it."
The only part that I could see from my skimming that referred to a fake toy guitar was this:
"Although system 10 is shown and described for use with an electric or amplified acoustic guitar, it can be used with a variety of other musical instruments which either directly, or indirectly through an interface device, will produce electrical audio signals representative of the sounds made by the instrument."
It seems to me that even if it's not a real guitar plugged in, they're still talking about using a device that can make music, not a video game controller in the shape of a guitar.
Cough
Edit: Gibson is going to lose this if they go through with it. They knew what Activision was doing. They gave the OK for their image to be used within multiple games. If it violated a patent, they should have brought this up in the first game instead of sitting back while Activision makes GH (knowing full well what it was), waiting for the game to get big, then suing them.
Also, there's a large difference between an instrument simulator and a game that simulates instruments.
IronClad Online: PurEvil
Here's the Techdirt write-up on this.
Personally, I can't stand this kind of crap anymore. This isn't even close to a patent that could touch Guitar Hero. It's all posturing trying to get some settlement money. Screw 'em.
XBL: NSMike | Steam | PSN: NSMike | Wii Friend Code: 7763 1519 2475 2278 | GWJ Google Calendar
From my understanding of it, no they aren't. They are simply talking about a device that will send signals to some controller that modifies the sound of a prerecorded audio track (i.e. Play parts of the song, don't play others). They make it very clear in the patent that all the audio and video for the device has been prerecorded.
Jadawin wrote:
Harmonix response: http://blog.wired.com/games/2008/03/harmonix-respon.html
Fedaykin98 wrote:
wordsmythe wrote:
I have not read through any of it myself, and I'm not a lawyer, but this is a classic patent troll manuever.
Step 1) File for Patent/Buy Patent
Step 2) Sit on Patent
Step 3) Wait for someone else to develop your idea and prove it is/can be profitable
Step 4) Sue them
I don't know that the above is what happened here, but that type of behavior is descpicable, and is exactly why I'm interested in the patent process and patent reform.
Typically the company doing the suing is large with big pockets - they sit on an arsenal of patents and sue smaller companies that are actually out there, developing and implementing new products. The large companies can sit through lengthy court proceedings and eat lawyers fees. A small company on the bleeding edge cannot afford to stop operations (even temporarily) based on a court order and a settlement against them will often result in them shutting their doors.
Suing a competitor for violating your patent is one thing. Sitting around and letting someone else develop an idea, then going to court years later is reprehensible.
Of course the burden goes both ways - if you're inventing something new, you have an obligation to (or at least ought to) make sure it's actually new. If you have a patent, you do have to actively defend it. It comes up in trademarks quite often - you have to actively defend the mark to prove that you're maintaining it.
It boggles my mind that Gibson/Red Octane/Activision could have been in close contact for years working out the licensing deals for Guitar Hero and never had a chance to communicate about the possibility that Gibson's patents were being infringed.
The whole thing reeks of greed from here - someone and maybe everyone involved. They have been making money hand over fist, and they couldn't work out a deal where everyone was happy? Someone is being greedy.
MrDeVil909: I feel it necessary to point out that there are drug resistant strains of most STDs. Especially in developing nations.
Funkenpants: Great. Yet another area in which we're losing our lead to foreigners.
Read the abstract of the patent.
This patent is for a system(not a game) to simulate a performance environment. The system takes in a real guitar's signal and plays it back on top of a prerecorded soundtrack. It does not stop if a note is missed. Also, it can be used as a pure practice environment by turning off the guitar portion of the soundtrack.
This is pretty significantly different than what Guitar Hero does. First off, you don't use a real guitar. The patent states that a real guitar is needed for the system to work. Secondly, there is no mention of the on-screen cues that GH uses. Thirdly, the entire setup is used to replay a specific pre-recorded concert, not a simulated one like GH/rock band. Fourth, the patent does not require a computer to generate the information-it's just a playback device. While there is some control over what sounds are made, it appears that the system does not choose what the user hears. A child randomly strumming will have the same effect on the playback as a professional using it to practice.
The patent is actually a pretty cool device for practicing the guitar. It's not what GH does, though. It's a pity that Gibson is going the litigation route rather than producing it.
WoW-Dark Iron: Cuberen(80 Druid), Spacecube(70 Shaman), Deathcube(60 Deathknight)
I could not find the 3D headset mentioned anywhere in the claims, only in the abstract. The claims only make reference to a video display. And I believe the claims hold more weight than the abstract.
In regards to what the device actually does, it clearly states that what is played is a prerecorded soundtrack (both for background and for the actual performance). However, the performance audio is adjusted based upon how you play the guitar. So I do believe this is doing something very similar to what Guitar Hero is doing. While it never states it would play / not play notes based upon which string you hit, I believe it is the same thing.
However, I forgot the most basic rule of patents. It doesn't matter if you invention does the same thing as another's, as long as it does it in a significantly different manner, which Guitar Hero obvisously does. So, no, I don't think Gibson will win the case.
Jadawin wrote:
I think the argument should focus more around the fact that Gibson was buddy-buddy for years until their agreement expired. Now they're using this patent trolling to leverage more money out of the deal. Nothing more. That's more important to this case IMHO than the accuracy of the patent in question.
XBL: NSMike | Steam | PSN: NSMike | Wii Friend Code: 7763 1519 2475 2278 | GWJ Google Calendar
It sounds like the case has no real merit. I suspect Gibson will offer to settle out of court for a few million. I hope, simply for the sake of what is right, that Harmonix et al. do not take them up on their offer. That's just feeding the troll and encouraging more of this kind of thing.
"It's a doggie-dog world."
-overheard on the subway, in a conversation between two gum-chewing girls
You know, Honestly, it's this kind of crap that that kind of keeps me from following through with any of the ideas that I come up with that have any sort of merit. It seems like whenever someone has a good idea that they actually follow through on, some sleazy asshole in a shiny suit is right behind them ready to f'em over. I have a whole freakin closet full of crap that just pop up and could be a winner. I mean even for this kind of spurious bullsh*t, a court case can ruin a small company (which Harmonix is not anymore, granted) just in legal fees alone, regardless of outcome. I mean who wants to go through all the hassle of inventing, producing, marketing, etc. when some patent squatter is just going to pop up and screw you anyways. It's not just patents either. It seems like the minute you start a business someone already filing charges for undelivered services, or some other nonsense like that.
sorry, rant over.
Mex wrote: