Wave Bye, Bye!

The ongoing saga between Nintendo and Texas-based Anascape, LTD went into overtime this week as U.S. District Judge Ron Clark has not only denied the Japanese console giant's request for a new trial, but has issued a ban on all products found to be in violation of Anascape's held patents.  This ban would apply to all Nintendo-made Gamecube controllers (including the wireless Wavebird), Nintendo Wii Classic Controller, and the Nintendo Gamecube itself.  The ban is set to go into motion July 23rd, and does not include other Wii related technology such as the Wiimote or Nunchuk attachment.

Although this judgement must be a blow to the virtual goodluck train that Nintendo has been riding these past 18+ months, as the allegations of patent violation and subsequent ban apply primarily to Gamecube-modeled hardware and accessories, it shouldn't put much of a cramp in any long-term plans the company has with their best-selling Wii game console.  Texas-based Anascape, LTD recently won a $21 million dollar patient-violation lawsuit against the Japanese company, in which Nintendo fully intends to bring their case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

While in no way am I claiming to be anything other than an outside observer, its clear from the testimony given and supporting facts of the case that the claims of the plaintiff, Brad Armstrong and his Anascape, LTD, must be called into question.  With reports that Armstrong "became fascinated with computers including video games" and began to develop videogame controllers in the late 1970s is not in question, how this fascination and any subsequent application to these digital dreams and inventions to the real world must be examined more closely.  Armstrong's attorney, Doug Cawley, has stated that Anascape, LTD has plans to enter the market - one clogged by Nintendo - and had already licensed their patent with Sony in 2004 and settled lawsuit claims with Microsoft in May of this year.  Only Nintendo thought it imperative to prove the technology they were using didn't originate from patents owned by Anascape, or from Brad Armstrong.

What leads the impartial party - to be fair Texas does have a reputation of strange judicial discretion - to question the motives of both Brad Armstrong and Anascape, LTD is the simple, yet largely ignored fact that for the most part, Anscape, LTD doesn't exist.  It defies any reasonable logic to assume that this company, which lacks any physical or economical presence, should enter a market without so much as a storefront or established product.  A simple background check on both Armstrong or any Anascape holdings will return nothing, and outside published court papers and public documents the company  fails to register any achievements whatsoever, outside of the lawsuit.

If a registered patent does exist that includes the concepts of analog sticks and such by Armstrong that would appear to be similar to that used in controllers released by Nintendo and their peers, that would certainly necessitate some form of legal understanding between the parties.  However, the larger picture would be the development and subsequentl failure to produce or otherwise act on what can only be described as theoretical patents.  That Armstrong created designs and patented their existance is without question, but his post-patent company Anascape, LTD's wishes to extract financial gain from a line of products only after they became profitable - not to mention a post-2004 license agreement with Sony - smack of a company less interested in protecting intellectual property than one only interested in exploiting theoretical concepts far too complex for them to bring forth themselves.

Special thanks to Bloomberg!