Comments (68)
Snookies12  +   760d ago
Hah! Of course they would... Call of Duty is primarily played on that system... Wouldn't want to lose their precious sales, now would they? I seriously doubt it's just because it's "wrong".
#1 (Edited 760d ago ) | Agree(61) | Disagree(6) | Report | Reply
LightofDarkness  +   760d ago
"Wouldn't want to lose their precious sales, now would they?"

I'm getting the impression you think there's something wrong or ulterior here?

Totes man, curse these for-profit organizations and their love of profits! /s

I don't see anything wrong with a 3rd party wanting to limit the damage they might incur from a petty patent dispute, between one party they rely on and another, who have chosen to pursue yet another childish patent suit.
#1.1 (Edited 760d ago ) | Agree(18) | Disagree(20) | Report | Reply
adorie  +   760d ago
Funny you say that, ms is always hovering on the opposite side of a Google related patent dispute. Most tech companies are locked up in patent disputes right now,as well.

I hope MS loses this one, they need to enjoy some humility.
joab777  +   759d ago
Me either. And why doesn't Microsoft just pay up like everyone else. I can't imagine a ban is a possibility. Or appeal and stretch it out 5 years until the 360 is obsolete. But yeah profits are good for everyone.
Prince_Dim-Lu  +   760d ago
What's wrong with them not wanting to lose money?
mugoldeneagle03  +   760d ago
It probably has less to do with a business losing money
And more to do with Activision losing money
SilentNegotiator  +   760d ago
Nothing. But I mean, it IS obvious why. Some of Xbox LIVE's funds even get directed straight to them. They'd probably be half as strong if Xbox disappeared from NA.
WeskerChildReborned  +   760d ago
Yep, they probably just care about that money and if it did get banned, they would probably make PS3 their leading console.
BubloZX  +   760d ago
Obama : okay Activison I'll agree to not go through with the ban on one condition.
Activison: cool! what's that?
Obama: you must agree to pay half of whatever fees Motorola and Microsoft agree upon. Do we have a deal?
Activison: *pats Microsoft's back* well I'll be with you in spirit my friend! Best of luck to you. Think I'm going to pay my old friends Sony and Nintendo a visit. :3
#1.4 (Edited 760d ago ) | Agree(20) | Disagree(6) | Report | Reply
SilentNegotiator  +   760d ago
I wasn't aware that the president had any word in a matter like this....
BubloZX  +   760d ago
@SilentNegotiator

Motorola already won the court case but apparently Obama has to sign off on this for then ban to go into affect.
SilentNegotiator  +   760d ago
Well that's crap. Why should the executive branch be involved in the process? And now that I've looked over the process, why involve a judge at all???!?? You may as well have some sort of internal judge in the ITC if all you're going to do is take the judge's decision under consideration. And then for the executive branch to make the final call? WUT?

What stupidity. That process makes so little sense.

The judge and ITC only have veto power, and then it's passed off to the executive branch? No, no, no, no....you don't give a trade power straight to the executive like that. That is absolutely nonsensical. If you're going to do that, then it needs to go to congress (at least first), not the executive.

Sigh....politics and government...
#1.4.3 (Edited 760d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(1) | Report
BitbyDeath  +   760d ago
Lol Bubz for the laugh BubloZX
Dakidog  +   760d ago
@SilentNegotiator

I don't see the difference between it going to w/e branch lol, but if it helps...It's the Executives branches job to decide to enforce it or not, it's not like it didn't go through the Judicial system first. The checks and balances system works fine(when the entire government isn't corrupt). I don't think it's at Obama's desk yet btw...but to the ITC board of commissioners.
zeal0us  +   760d ago
I wonder if the 360 did get ban would Activision start catering to the PS3&PC audience more?
Forbidden_Darkness  +   759d ago
You are quite aware that this wont effect consoles already sold right? And thus, Activision will still see just as strong of sales on the 360 as it always has. It might lose new console owner sales on the 360, but it'll still sell more i'm sure and at this point, MS will have their next Xbox out within a year or two, so it wont be that bad.
dcbronco  +   760d ago
It's really going to get funny when MS gets all Motorola phones banned. They won a similar case against Motorola. And since Motorola is a struggling company, how long before they go out of business or have to reach an agreement. Acting this way might get then in bankruptcy court.

I think it might be better for Motorola to just excuses each others mistakes and move on. After all, MS could just announce the 720 and move on. Motorola is kinda stuck. Plus MS could really stick it to them and introduce a 360 based cablebox and crush what little income they still have.
BitbyDeath  +   760d ago
Google bought Motorola out so money will not be a problem for them.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/...
dcbronco  +   760d ago
Thanks for the info. I missed that. Money may not be a problem. But it will still have to be settled. They have each other in the same predicament.
gaffyh  +   759d ago
It doesn't even matter if it gets banned, Microsoft could simply jump the gun on the next gen, and this lawsuit will probably fall in line with the launch of the next gen anyway.
aviator189  +   760d ago
I highly doubt that any publisher or media company would want to see any major console banned, especially if the publisher has games already in development for the respective console and in a huge market such as the United States. More consoles leads to more revenue and more customers to influence with their services and products.
#2 (Edited 760d ago ) | Agree(8) | Disagree(3) | Report | Reply
GamingPerson  +   760d ago
The judge owns a ps3.
joeorc  +   760d ago
why yes that's exactly it is it not?
LG wins PS3 import ban in Europe
February 28, 2011 12:10PM PST

http://www.gamespot.com/new...

where was Activision's out reach for Sony?

"Activision said in a submission to the US International Trade Commission that, as "one of the United States' largest video game publishers", it "has expended and continues to expend significant resources to develop video games and accessories specially adapted to operate on Microsoft's Xbox gaming console"
zeal0us  +   760d ago
Sony didn't throw any $$$ Activision's way like MS did.
M2-  +   760d ago
lol Motorola tried to do this with the PS3 in Europe too.
Solid_Snake37  +   760d ago
What the hell is motorolas problem? Why are they doing this?
M2-  +   760d ago
Whoops! It was actually LG who requested an import ban of the PS3 in Europe not Motorola, LG won a 10 day ban.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/t...

I apologize for my mistake.
_Aarix_  +   760d ago
wow really, they tried to ban the xbox and I heard nothing but bad things like "whoo! they deserve it" "I hope they get banned" But ONE talk about sony and its "What the hell is motorolas problem?" WTF!
Solid_Snake37  +   760d ago
@_Aarix_ No bro, i didnt mean why they are doing this to the ps3. I meant why are they on a console banning streak. What is their problem?
#4.1.3 (Edited 760d ago ) | Agree(4) | Disagree(1) | Report
betrayed gamer  +   760d ago
ok so let me get this right motorola was overcharging ms. ms said no and did what they wanted so motorola took them to court to get their system banned? how come i see this as a load?
darkride66  +   760d ago
Not quite how I understood it. Microsoft has been paying Motorola their fees for years, but suddenly decided it was too much and stopped. Kinda like saying "Sure I'm been renting the apartment for years, and I still live here but I'm not paying any rent anymore because suddenly I think it's too high."

So far some courts have agreed but they're still working through it. Motorola proved in court that their royalties were in keeping with similar royalties across the industry. The judge commented that this all boiled down to "arrogant" and profit-driven business manoeuvres.

So how do you force a company like Microsoft to do something they don't want to? You go to the courts and say, "Pay up or you're out." What else are they supposed to do? Just let Microsoft bully them into paying whatever Microsoft feels like paying for technology they don't own?
dcbronco  +   760d ago
Can't argue with you there. I would just say since they lost a suit with MS that could ban all of their phones, I would figure out a compromise.
sjaakiejj  +   760d ago
Activision would not be commercially harmed, as their sales depend on current installed base - not on Microsoft's ability to sell more consoles.
Captain Qwark 9  +   760d ago
yes becuase increasing the installed base doesnt mean more potential buyers.....:/
sjaakiejj  +   760d ago
If they can't buy an Xbox, they'll buy a Ps3.

But game sales don't increase with any new Xbox sales. Call of Duty sales for instance have remained roughly the same, regardless of the number of Xbox owners.

Besides, be honest.. Call of Duty is Activision's main source of income, and those games aren't very expensive to make any more. An extra 500k sales really wouldn't make much of a difference any more for Activision's financial situation.
Dlacy13g  +   760d ago
@sjaakiejj... the implication of impact on software publishers extends beyond Activision..this will impact all software publishers / developers bringing games out to the 360 in the coming year.

to your point about COD, the COD install base while slowing down in its growth still attracts many new players just as many older players have jumped ship..
Captain Qwark 9  +   760d ago
your assuming everyone who wants a 360 wants a ps3 which we all know isnt the case. so they may just hold out instead of buying a ps3, therefore it would be a lost sale.

also they could have people buying both consoles anyway, increasing the user base and selling even more.

also while the sales have remained roughly the same, the franchise continues to see new players join and old players retire ( prob becuase they release a new one every year and they are going to burn out the franchise similar to guitar hero and tony hawk ) so without the new players joining and just old retiring, they will lose sales.

there are many different outcomes this could have but almost all of them point to potentially lost sales with the exception of yours which, no offense, is prob the least likely outcome.
sjaakiejj  +   760d ago
@Diacy13g

Publisher's don't really care what platform they sell it on, as long as it sells. Call of Duty is a platform seller if it's only on one platform in America, hence software sales would remain largely unaffected.

@Qwark

Call of Duty is a system seller. If people can't buy an Xbox to play it on, they buy a Ps3. The people buying consoles now really don't care much what platform it is on, they pick the cheapest one that is available, which in the case of an Xbox ban would be the Playstation, Wii-U (probably) or PC.

These people just want to play their Call of Duty. If they cared about the platforms at all, they would've already bought them. You're referring to the consumers known as "early adopters", who are really into tech and platforms. People like you and me, who chat on these websites. I can guarantee you that there's no-one on N4G (or any other gaming website) that doesn't have a strong PC or either Ps3 or 360 yet.
rebirthofcaos  +   760d ago
lets procced with the ban to see how it could go, may be funny.
Arnon  +   760d ago
This would ultimately result with job layoffs with Microsoft's internal studios. Why would you want something like that?
rebirthofcaos  +   760d ago
It wont end in layoffs, if there is a ban more likely it could last one week maybe.but to result in layoffs it is almost impossible.
Arnon  +   760d ago
If a ban happens, it means it is banned. And if it is banned for a piece of hardware inside of the console, it will result in either a massive fee being paid, or a recall from the market.

Both of those options can easily result in job layoffs.
Topshelfcheese  +   760d ago
I don't get the argument that one can steal tech and get away with it, just because other companies would suffer from them being caught. I'm not saying Microsoft stole anything, because I don't know. But if they really did, than they should have to pay for it, regardless of how it effects IBM, Activision, etc...
betrayed gamer  +   760d ago
yea they should pay, but they should pay a reasonable price. thats what started this sh*t storm. motorola wanting 4 billion a year for the patents. which is alot more then what other companies are paying for them. i believe both companies are wrong and should be punished
sjaakiejj  +   760d ago
"motorola wanting 4 billion a year for the patents"

That was only after Microsoft repeatedly refused to pay standard royalties (3.5%) over something that they considered "industry standard", and then sued Motorola over Android phones.

Microsoft started this, not Motorola. Motorola just responded.
#8.1.1 (Edited 760d ago ) | Agree(7) | Disagree(10) | Report
svoulis  +   760d ago
How much do you think Microsoft makes from charging us gamers 60 dollars a year to use our internet (which we pay for), watch our netflix (which we pay for) and play games that have online added (which we pay for as well).

Microsoft won't pay up but they have no problem making us pay up for the things we already have/do pay for.

It's pathetic and Microsoft knows it. Yes, its a ridiculous number that Moto/Google wants, but why not? They know Microsoft has it, all Microsoft does is talk about how much money they make between Computers and the Xbox.

Imagine it this way. The Xbox 360 is actually an internet FILTER until you pay for the subscription to unlock everything it can do. Thats exactly what Xbox Live Gold is. An internet crippler that forces you to pay in order to enjoy your online capabilities. On top of adding promotional ads on your dashboard.
Micro$oft.

I hope some how they turn this around more fairly but its nice to see a smaller company (Motorola) go after such a big company and get what is rightfully (in every way) theirs.
#8.1.2 (Edited 760d ago ) | Agree(8) | Disagree(4) | Report
JackBNimble  +   760d ago
MS will most likely be forced to continue paying the 2.25% plus back pay from when they stopped paying motorla. I would expect the price of xboxlive to increase if and when MS is forced to start paying again.
#8.1.3 (Edited 760d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report
DarkBlood  +   760d ago
*drinks coffee* i see........................... .
Dlacy13g  +   760d ago
This is a very interesting twist, I wonder how the courts will look at the effect such a ban would have not only on the big publishers but the smaller ones too. Motorola's import ban would have bigger ramifications than just Microsofts bottom line. Thats a fact the courts can't just take lightly.
mechlord  +   760d ago
I think people are overreacting and overthinking this. Like someone said, the ban wont last forever, if it happens. I mean, PS3 was banned in europe for 10 days right? what happened then? i dont recall any game losing potential sales or someshit, so why would it happen with MS?
Dlacy13g  +   760d ago
I agree that it likely won't last long. From a court stand point though I am not sure they are concerned about anything beyond what their ruling would do if handed down and was a permanent change.
AusRogo  +   760d ago
I may not like ms much (though I do own a 360) I hope they win. Motorola are asking For a ridiculous amount of money, they should make ms pay a reasonable amount. 4 billion is a bit much!
#11 (Edited 760d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(6) | Report | Reply
mechlord  +   760d ago
look, its not like they just came with $4bn out of their asses. MS isnt paying royalties for some time, so that number is probably covering that plus interests..

You also should consider that offending companies sometimes reason that settlements costs less than actually paying what they owe the right way, ie before it getting to the courts.

Say MS had a debt of 1 billion. they could reason that a settlement would have them pay half of it, so they would gladly let the problem escalate to the courts instead of paying up the debt; thats why i think Motorola went with 4 billion.
sriki007  +   760d ago
if it didn't impact COD sales they wouldn't have said a thing..
Majin-vegeta  +   760d ago
Ding ding we have a winner.
Smootherkuzz  +   760d ago
Moto don't need the money it's like the thrill of the hunt
Urbz7870  +   760d ago
No limited edition Halo 4 and Black Ops II Xbox360.
DFresh  +   760d ago
Whether this ban passes or not we're going into the next generation in 1-2 years anyway.
At that point people will just upgrade to PS4/Xbox 720.
I still don't think this will pass simply because just like every company a compromise always gets made before ever needing to go to court.
svoulis  +   760d ago
It's not that simple really do you even know what patents Microsoft has "infringed" on?

"secure wireless communication and transmission of video content between controller devices and game consoles"

Motorola also alleges in its suit that Windows mobile software, Windows Marketplace, Bing maps and some video encoding programs, as well as Wi-Fi connectivity and password technologies used in the Xbox, violate Motorola's patents.

This would require some type of agreement/settlement in general for the neXtBox to be able to use a very very popular codec.

Motorola is being selfish but why not, it's their patent and they know Microsoft has money.
user4500854   760d ago | Spam
Phoenix76  +   760d ago
what patents excactly has MS infringed on that warrents Motorola's actions??

Answers on a postcard pls lol
sjaakiejj  +   760d ago
The one that stands out in particular is Motorola's patent on the H264 codec, e.g. the industry-standard codec used for High Definition video.

There's some others relating to wireless communication and transmission of video content between devices.

More details here:
http://www.joystiq.com/2012...
NeloAnjelo  +   760d ago
No one cares about Activision's opinion on anything. They are best at killing franchises... stick to that.
mochachino  +   760d ago
Even in the unlikely event Motorola wins, Xbox has sold enough consoles already to ensure that COD reaches similar sales to the last iterations. The ban would cost Activision a few hundred thousand sales at most.
GraveLord  +   760d ago
The Sky is Blue.
BitbyDeath  +   760d ago
I'm sure MS will be waiting with the next Xbox on standby if this ever happens.
jhenri  +   759d ago
The problem with that is if the next Xbox is using the same tech than it would be banned too. If it isn't, than it would probably be a rush job in getting it out which could lead to another rrod situation.
Tzunoy  +   759d ago
Money Money Money in the end they will destroy everything.
#22 (Edited 759d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
Remember