Microsoft Triumphs In Multiplayer Gaming Patent Battle

"Hochstein and Tenenbaum sued both Sony and Microsoft for patent infringement in 2004, claiming that both companies employed methods similar to the ones described in their patent to allow two players to communicate while playing a video game in two different places."

The story is too old to be commented.
ironwolf2601d ago

So Sony chickened and settled. I wonder how their lawyers will explain that one to the board and stockholders.

kneon2601d ago

Depends how much it cost them, sometimes it's cheaper to pay than to fight it out and win. Corporate lawyers are expensive.


Yeah but since MS won the company that was suing them now have to pay MS legal expenses.

DaCajun2601d ago

Wouldn't have these problems if the patent process actually worked correctly like stop patenting ideas, only actual working products should be patented. Some of these leaches out there look to see what might be in the horizon and patent an idea hoping some big Corporation will invent something similar then wait to see it become a success. Then they go around filing lawsuits. Same leaches all the time.

kneon2601d ago


In most of the world yes that would be the case, but in most of the US the loser doesn't necessarily have to pay the winners court costs. If they did then there would be far fewer frivolous lawsuits.

nickjkl2601d ago

idk dac

if i had an idea that i could make the most advanced system possible just not the funds to make it mainstream

should i not have the ability to patent it

gamingdroid2601d ago (Edited 2601d ago )

It is costly, but far less than settling. The reason for settling is the drawn out process and the risk of loosing. If you loose you tend to be out far more money than settling. Thus, settling makes it go away, and the loss accounted for up front.

Businesses are averse to risk.


Sony can just explain it the same way they did, when ironically MS and Sony got sued by Immersion for the rumble. MS settle, then later got a cut of the Sony-Immersion lawsuit.

Then later there were more lawsuits between Immersion and MS. Not sure what the outcome was.

Personally, I wish the government would do something about these screwed up lawsuits. Heck, I have to carry all sorts of insurance just to protect myself. I can't even go to the doctor or have people over without fear of lawsuit/bankruptcy. Albeit this is different than patents, yet the issue still remains.


Kneon is correct, in the US the loosing party isn't automatically liable for the cost. The original intention was to allow the common man to fight big corporations without fear of major repercussions, unfortunately in the last two decades, it has become an acceptable trend in our society to frivolously sue you.

With the cost of a single stamp, a lawyer in the US can bankrupt any individual without any proof of wrongdoing!

It doesn't mean MS didn't get paid court costs as they can ask for it, and the judge can grant it, but it is not automatic by default.

SITH2601d ago (Edited 2601d ago )

It is not cheaper to pay if you win! You receive lawyer and court cost for winning. It depends on state and or federal cases though.

There are three cases where the losing side generally may be required to pay the winner’s legal fees. This depends on the state if it’s not a federal issue: 

Family law matters, challenges to a will or trust or certain real estate disputes. These are certain types of cases where some state law requires the loser to pay the winner’s attorney’s fees.
If a contract specifically states that the losing side pays the winning side’s legal fees in a breach of contract suit.
Cases that involves violations of state or federal laws, where the law itself requires the loser to pay the other side’s legal fees. These cases are lawsuits against a government entity or a business or organization for violation of privacy, safety or anti-discrimination laws. This is the case in certain civil rights laws and environmental protection laws.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 2601d ago
trikster402601d ago

Corporations don't settle because they are chicken. They do it because they can settle for a price a fraction of the lawsuit. Imagine if the judge hadn't dismissed the case. MS would have had to pay the patent holders millions of dollars.

FYI, see

Microsoft settled, Sony didn't. Microsoft "chickened" as you would call it and spent little in doing so. Sony fought it and pretty much lost, costing over $120 million. So, settling is "chicken" huh?

newleaf2601d ago

They didn't pretty much lose, they lost period. All that says is that Microsoft know when to quit and when to stick it out...SONY don't.

Karlnag32601d ago

Oh yeah, newleaf?! Well, my Dad's bigger than your Dad so nyeeeeeueuuuh.


MysticStrummer2601d ago

@Newleaf - I'm just glad Sony knows when to release a console so that the hardware doesn't fail at an unprecedented rate. It's a shame MS did so well this gen by not knowing how to do that. How either company does in a lawsuit of this kind is none of my concern, but the reliability of any purchased hardware is always a concern, except in the US apparently.

Vega752601d ago

good thing MS know when to undate their security for their network servers and not run with outdated security and lose millions of people personal info. see what i did there

sikbeta2601d ago

You people can bash to each other all day, point is, MS had to actually fight for it because XGC is a key feature for XBL service if not the more important, Sony really didn't push this situation any further because there was no case in it, as you can see, they didn't developed the PS3 with XGC in mind and the idea was to deliver it later by shrinking the OS memory, Sony didn't implemented XGC at the time this lawsuit came out, why fight a battle for a feature they didn't actually bring to PSN in first place?

IdleLeeSiuLung2601d ago

@MysticStrummer - Too bad Sony don't know how to secure their network and allowed one of the biggest security breaches in the history of the internet. It's a shame Sony is doing so well not knowing how to secure customer information.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 2601d ago
Captain Tuttle2601d ago

Good post but for god's sake it's "losing", not "loosing"

SuperKing2601d ago

Some of the software patents I've seen are borderline insanity.


Yeah but can you imagine a world with out them.

Samsung could make a game console exactly like the PS3 with Blu Rey and all and put SAMSUNG on it and put it out in the market.

The world would be full of clones and noboby would want to think of something unique instead the will just still the idea form someone else.

Soldierone2601d ago

So who here wants to go think of random ideas for everything, patent them all, but do nothing with it? Then when a company that is actually capable of doing it we can just sue them and get a few bucks.....

That's all I have seen lately with these stories. When people go to court like this, they should have an "intent to use patent" in order to win or justify a case, or have filed it within a year or two. The first one will force the company or person to bring a prototype, blue-prints, and business related items showing they have the funding and capability to do it, along with an explanation on why they sat on it forever.

rdgneoz32601d ago

Yah, if the company / person actually has the intent to create whats in the patent / a a prototype for it, then I can see them winning if the similarities are obvious. But if they're just sitting back and waiting for someone to create something, make millions from it, and then try to sue them over, then they deserve nothing.

sikbeta2601d ago

It's called "Patent Trolling" you can patent whatever the hell you want and wait for some company to actually deliver that thing you patented, then sue them for "using and developing based on your idea", hordes of lawyers will try to win for you IF that patented thing can print cash or if the company is big enough to spend millions... unbelievable, but true...

v1c1ous2601d ago

this is good, it means our multiplayer games aren't in jeapordy

Bigpappy2601d ago

Thanks M$. This helps everyone in the industry, including those who would like to see M$ die and go away. Just shows why hating the compitition is really dumb.

Show all comments (28)