Note: You must be registered in order to post a reply.
|T O P I C R E V I E W|
|AnonJr||Posted - 13 Mar 2008 : 09:11:27|
I'll start off with this: I'm really tired of the stupid patent lawsuits. I've been following www.techrepublic.com for a while now, and I agree with the increasing number of people over there who have come to realize that the types of patents that Gibson is fussing over are rather obvious. Last time I checked, we weren't supposed to patent the obvious. Add to that the fact that they waited 3 years to file a claim... well I'll let you read the article and come to your own conclusions.
[Computer World: Guitar Hero violates patent, Gibson says]
What do you think?
|2 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First)|
|AXEMAN2415||Posted - 22 Mar 2008 : 11:48:49|
Yes, and I believe it was with the guitar producer, Paul Reed Smith, because the early models had very much a similar shape to the Gibson Les Paul.
I have been reading this issue, but I must admit to a little confusion as to who is actually at fault in this. But, if I have read this correctly, Gibson is being a bit childish over all of this. I do not see how a video game, where the instrument looks like a guitar, yet isn't even triggered the same as a real guitar, and cannot function without the game itself.
For Gibson to try and sue retailers for carrying the game is really arrogant. What's next? Suing the consumers for buying the game that was already approved for sale? Believe me, Gibson has a wonderful product. Expensive, but well worth it. But this kind of thing is what will drive people to Fender or other guitar companies. This is just dumb coming from Gibson. There's been no patent infringement. It is nothing but a money grab coming under the guise of being a victim.
|AnonJr||Posted - 22 Mar 2008 : 09:52:23|
Now, not only is Gibson suing Activision, they are suing whoever sells the "infringing" guitar controllers. Here's the TechDirt Article with the update:
from the who-else-can-we-sue dept
by Mike Masnick
Remember how Activision had preemptively sued Gibson for a declaratory judgment that it didn't infringe on a really questionable patent concerning a computerized guitar for a "virtual" concert? Well, Gibson has now struck back, and it's not just suing Activision, but almost all the retailers who sell it as well, including Wal-Mart, Target, Kmart, Amazon.com, Toys 'R' Us and GameStop. The idea, clearly, is to have those retailers put pressure on Activision. Update: Wired reports that the lawsuit also covers a bunch of other companies. Basically, Gibson is suing anyone even remotely connected to video games that involve fake guitars.
Of course, there are all sorts of questionable things about this lawsuit. As we pointed out when Activision first sued, Gibson's patent doesn't seem similar to "Guitar Hero" at all. It talks about playing a real concert, with a real guitar (with strings) attached to a head mounted display. Also, as Activision points out, Gibson didn't care about the patent as long as Activision and Gibson had a marketing agreement. They only started calling for patent infringement after the marketing agreement ended. Finally, suing retailers for selling the game is quite sketchy. In fact, the Supreme Court just heard a case looking at whether or not that was legit, and the Justices sounded quite skeptical. Gibson is clearly posturing to try to push for a settlement -- and in the process, showing yet another way to abuse the patent system.
Some of the commenters seem to think that this will impact Gibson's reputation and real sales. In light of all that is going on, do you agree?
Personally, I don't see this being a deciding factor for a significant number of real guitarists. Didn't Gibson have a patent issue with another company because one of their products looked too much like a Les Paul?