Editing Wii

Jump to: navigation, search

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision Your text
Line 174: Line 174:
  
 
The Wii Remote can lose track of the Wii system it has been set to, requiring that it be reset and resynchronized. Nintendo's support website provides instructions for this process and troubleshooting related issues.
 
The Wii Remote can lose track of the Wii system it has been set to, requiring that it be reset and resynchronized. Nintendo's support website provides instructions for this process and troubleshooting related issues.
 +
 +
===Legal issues===
 +
{{See also|Wii Remote#Legal issues|l1=Legal issues of the Wii Remote}}
 +
 +
Both the Wii console, Wii Remote and other accessories were the focus of these lawsuits.
 +
 +
Lonestar Inventions, L.P., a [[Texas]]-based company, sued Nintendo in June 2006, claiming that the company copied one of Lonestar's patented [[capacitor]] designs and used it in the Wii console.<ref name="RECAP2">{{cite web|url=https://www.engadget.com/2007/06/18/lonestar-sues-nintendo-over-wii-capacitor-design/|title=Lonestar sues Nintendo over Wii capacitor design|last=Quilty-Harper|first=Conrad|date=June 18, 2006|publisher=Engadget/Wall Street Journal|accessdate=June 19, 2007}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|url=http://archive.org/details/gov.uscourts.txed.103593|title=gov.uscourts.txed.103593|others=RECAP Project|accessdate=August 12, 2018}}</ref> The two companies agreed to dismiss all claims by July 20, 2009, alongside a settlement made between Lonestar and AMD, which provided Nintendo's microprocessor [[technology]]; whether the Lonestar-Nintendo dismissal included any out-of-court settlement terms was not clear.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.law360.com/articles/111968/lonestar-amd-settle-ip-suit-over-nintendo-wii-chip|title=Lonestar, AMD Settle IP Suit Over Nintendo Wii Chip|last=Davis|first=Ryan|date=July 17, 2009|work=[[Law360]]|accessdate=December 28, 2017}}</ref><ref name="RECAP2"/>
 +
 +
Anascape Ltd, a [[Texas]]-based firm, filed a lawsuit in the Summer of 2006 against Nintendo for patent infringement regarding the vibrational feedback used by Nintendo's controllers.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/933/1027933/microsoft-nintendo-sued-over-games-controller|title=Microsoft, Nintendo sued over games controller|date=August 3, 2006|publisher=The Inquirer|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20071226182628/http://www.theinquirer.net/en/inquirer/news/2006/08/03/microsoft-nintendo-sued-over-games-controller|archivedate=December 26, 2007|accessdate=December 8, 2006}}</ref> A July 2008 verdict banned Nintendo from selling the [[Classic Controller]] in the United States, in addition to the GameCube and Wavebird controllers. Following an appeal to the [[United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit|U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit]],<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.gamespot.com/forums/system-wars-314159282/nintendo-faces-ban-on-some-wii-controllers-26503822/|title=Nintendo Faces Ban on Some Wii, GameCube Controllers (Update2)|last=Decker|first=Susan|date=July 22, 2008|accessdate=September 25, 2008|publisher=Bloomberg.com}}</ref> on April 22, 2010 the Federal Circuit Court ruled in Nintendo's favor.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.courthousenews.com/2010/04/22/26649.htm|title=Nintendo Wins Patent Dispute Over Controllers|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20100823191844/http://www.courthousenews.com/2010/04/22/26649.htm|archivedate=August 23, 2010|deadurl=yes|df=mdy-all}}</ref>
 +
 +
[[Interlink Electronics]] Inc. filed a patent-infringement lawsuit against Nintendo in December 2006 over the pointing functionality of the Wii Remote, claiming "loss of reasonable royalties, reduced sales and/or lost profits as a result of the infringing activities" of Nintendo.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://wii.ign.com/articles/750/750001p1.html|title=Nintendo Sued for Patent Infringement|last=Seff|first=Micah|date=December 8, 2006|publisher=IGN|accessdate=December 8, 2006|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20061213042423/http://wii.ign.com/articles/750/750001p1.html#|archive-date=December 13, 2006|dead-url=yes|df=mdy-all}}</ref><ref name="RECAP">{{Cite book|url=http://archive.org/details/gov.uscourts.ded.37438|title=gov.uscourts.ded.37438|others=RECAP Project|accessdate=August 12, 2018}}</ref> The lawsuit was dismissed by Interlink in March 2007.<ref name="RECAP"/><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://ia800200.us.archive.org/28/items/gov.uscourts.ded.37438/gov.uscourts.ded.37438.docket.html|title=Case docket: Interlink Electronics Inc. v. Nintendo of America|website=ia800200.us.archive.org|accessdate=August 12, 2018}}</ref>
 +
 +
In August 2008 [[Hillcrest Labs|Hillcrest Laboratories]] Inc. filed a complaint against Nintendo with the [[United States International Trade Commission|U.S International Trade Commission]], alleging that the Wii Remote infringed on three of its patents. A fourth Hillcrest patent (for graphical interfaces displayed on television screens) was also allegedly violated. Hillcrest sought a ban on Wii consoles imported to the U.S.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB121925111060757011|title=Start-Up Says Nintendo Violated Patents|last=Wingfield|first=Nick|date=August 21, 2008|accessdate=September 25, 2008|publisher=online.wsj.com}}</ref> On August 24, 2009 Nintendo and Hillcrest reached a settlement, although the terms were not publicly disclosed.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.theage.com.au/world/nintendo-settles-us-trade-fight-over-wii-20090825-ewno.html|title=Nintendo settles US trade fight over Wii|date=August 24, 2009|work=www.theage.com.au|accessdate=August 24, 2009|publisher=[[The Age]]|location=Melbourne}}</ref>
 +
 +
In November 2008,<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://dockets.justia.com/docket/texas/txedce/6:2008cv00429/112889|title=Motiva LLC v. Nintendo Co Ltd et al|website=Justia Dockets & Filings|language=en|access-date=2018-08-29}}</ref> Motiva LLC filed a lawsuit against Nintendo in the U.S. International Trade Commission claiming that the Wii violated two of its patents for tracking body movement and position.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.kotaku.co.uk/2017/09/07/nintendos-long-history-of-beating-patent-lawsuits|title=Nintendo's Long History of Beating Patent Lawsuits|website=Kotaku UK|language=en|access-date=2018-07-01}}</ref> The USITC ruled in favour of Nintendo in January 2013, claiming that "Motiva's litigation was targeted at financial gains, not at encouraging adoption of Motiva’s patented technology,” and that “There is simply no reasonable likelihood that, after successful litigation against Nintendo, Motiva’s patented technology would have been licensed by partners who would have incorporated it.” The USITC also determined that Nintendo did not violate any of Motiva's patents.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-nintendo-motiva-decision-idUSBRE94C0WJ20130513|title=Nintendo wins appeals court decision over Wii|last=Stempel|first=Jonathan|work=U.S.|access-date=2018-07-01|language=en-US}}</ref>
 +
 +
In September 2011, ThinkOptics Inc. filed a lawsuit against Nintendo in [[U.S. District Court of the Eastern District of Texas|United States District Court of the Eastern District of Texas]] over their controller, the Wavit Remote, claiming that the Wii violated its patent for a "handheld vision based absolute pointing system", a "Handheld Device for Handheld Vision Based Absolute Pointing System", and a "Handheld Vision Based Absolute Pointing System", which make up the basis for the Wavit Remote. They also said that the Wii U infringes on their patents as well and claims that Nintendo was aware of the fact that the Wii allegedly violates ThinkOptics' patents. The lawsuit sought an [[injunction]] against violating products, [[Royalty payment|royalties]], [[attorney's fee]]s, and damages for lost profits.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://techcrunch.com/2011/09/07/nintendo-gets-sued-over-the-wii/|title=Nintendo Gets Sued Over The Wii|work=TechCrunch|access-date=2018-09-05|language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.law360.com/texas/articles/269491/thinkoptics-sues-nintendo-over-remote-control-patents|title=ThinkOptics Sues Nintendo Over Remote Control Patents - Law360|website=www.law360.com|language=en|access-date=2018-09-05}}</ref> The lawsuit was dismissed by ThinkOptics in August 2014.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://insight.rpxcorp.com/lit/txedce-132096-thinkoptics-v-nintendo-of-america|title=ThinkOptics, Inc v. Nintendo of America, Inc. et al|website=insight.rpxcorp.com|access-date=2018-09-05}}</ref>
 +
 +
Starting in December 2012, iLife Technologies Inc. sued several large companies over patent infringement over a set of patents they held related to "systems and methods for evaluating movement of a body relative to an environment", principally aimed at the medical field; Nintendo was sued by iLife in December 2013 for the Wii Remote's infringement on their patents, with the lawsuit seeking $144 million in damages, based on a $4 fine for the 36 million Wii and Wii U units it had sold to date.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.dallasobserver.com/news/a-dallas-inventor-is-suing-nintendo-for-stealing-his-idea-for-wii-us-motion-sensors-7124540|title=A Dallas Inventor Is Suing Nintendo for Stealing His Idea for Wii U's Motion Sensors|last=Nicholson|first=Eric|date=December 16, 2013|work=[[Dallas Observer]]|accessdate=December 28, 2017}}</ref> A jury trial was heard in August 2017, and the jury ruled in favor of iLife Technologies and Nintendo was forced to pay {{USD|10.1 million}} in damages.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/09/jury-finds-nintendo-wii-infringes-dallas-inventors-patent-awards-10m/|title=Jury finds Nintendo Wii infringes Dallas inventor’s patent, awards $10M|last=Mullin|first=Joe|date=September 1, 2017|work=[[Ars Technica]]|accessdate=December 28, 2017}}</ref> While Nintendo appealed this decision, the [[United States Court of Appeals]] upheld the jury's decision in December 2017.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.rollingstone.com/glixel/news/appeals-court-upholds-ilife-patent-in-10m-wii-gaming-judgment-w514792|title=Appeals Court Upholds iLife Patent in $10M Wii Gaming Judgment|date=December 28, 2017|work=[[Glixel]]|accessdate=December 28, 2017}}</ref>
 +
 +
====Wrist strap issues====
 +
The wrist strap of the Wii Remote has also been an issue.
 +
 +
In mid-December 2006, the law firm Green Welling LLP filed a [[class action]] lawsuit against Nintendo for its "defective wrist straps". A few days later, Nintendo issued a [[product recall]] for the wrist straps and issued a new version of the strap with an improved securing mechanism for the wrist, leading to the lawsuit being dropped sometime thereafter.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.chron.com/news/article/BW-Nintendo-Recalls-Defective-Wii-Wrist-Straps-1850489.php|title=Nintendo Recalls Defective Wii Wrist Straps After Class Action Filed by Green Welling LLP|date=December 16, 2006|accessdate=March 23, 2007|publisher=Business Wire|via=[[Houston Chronicle]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://kotaku.com/5108362/nintendo-faces-new-remote-strap-lawsuit|title=Nintendo Faces New Remote Strap Lawsuit|last=Fahey|first=Mike|date=December 12, 2008|work=[[Kotaku]]|accessdate=December 28, 2017}}</ref>
 +
 +
A second class-action lawsuit was filed by a mother in Colorado in December 2008, claiming the updated wrist straps were still ineffective.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/3725869/Nintendo-sued-over-dangerous-Wii-controllers.html|title=Nintendo sued over 'dangerous' Wii controllers|last=Beaumont|first=Claudine|date=December 12, 2008|work=[[The Daily Telegraph]]|accessdate=December 28, 2017}}</ref> This suit was dismissed by September 2010, finding for Nintendo that the wrist straps were not knowingly faulty under Colorado consumer protection laws.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.law360.com/articles/196315/nintendo-sends-wii-safety-strap-case-packing|title=Nintendo Sends Wii Safety Strap Case Packing|last=Howard|first=Samual|date=September 24, 2010|work=[[Law360]]|accessdate=December 28, 2017}}</ref>
 +
 +
====Trademark issues====
 +
In 2000, the term "[[Weemote]]" was trademarked by [[Miami]] based TV remote manufacturer [[Fobis Technologies]] and was later used as the name of their remote designed for young children.<ref name="time">{{cite web|url=http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1824499,00.html|title=The Weemote vs. Wiimote Tiff|author=Padgett, Tim|date=2008-07-18|work=TIME.com|accessdate=2008-08-01}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.remotecentral.com/weemote/index.html|title=RC: Fobis Technologies Weemote Kids' Remote Control Review (1)|website=www.remotecentral.com|access-date=2018-07-22}}</ref> While spelled differently, the term "Weemote" is phonetically identical to "Wiimote", the unofficial term for the Wii Remote.<ref name="time" /><ref name="gp1">{{cite web|url=http://www.gamepolitics.com/2008/07/23/small-firm039s-weemote-came-first-steamrolled-nintendo039s-wiimote|title=Small Firm's Weemote Came First, But Steamrolled by Nintendo's Wiimote|date=2008-07-23|work=GamePolitics.com|accessdate=2008-08-01}}</ref> Sales of the Weemote, which totalled less than one million as of 2008 had fallen due to confusion with the Wiimote.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080808075839/http://www.time.com:80/time/business/article/0,8599,1824499,00.html|title=The Weemote vs. Wiimote Tiff - TIME|date=2008-08-08|access-date=2018-08-29}}</ref> Fobis Technologies claims this to be [[trademark infringement]], however Nintendo does not actually use the term "Wiimote" in official promotional materials; but many retailers that sell the Wii Remote do use the term.<ref name="gp1" /> Fobis sent out up to 100 [[cease and desist]] letters to retailers and have made offers to Nintendo for them to purchase the trademark.<ref name="time" /><ref name="gp1" /> Nintendo declined the offer, stating that it "does not use and does not plan to use the Weemote trademark".<ref name="gp2">{{cite web|url=http://www.gamepolitics.com/2008/07/24/nintendo-comments-weemote-wiimote-flap-online-retailer-pressured|title=Nintendo Comments on Weemote-Wiimote Flap; Online Retailer Pressured|date=2008-07-24|work=GamePolitics.com|accessdate=2008-08-01}}</ref>
 +
 +
The trademark application for the Wii was filed in 2006, but it was not registered by the [[Us government|US government]] until July 2010.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://kotaku.com/5599903/wii-is-now-a-registered-trademark|title=Wii Is Now a Registered Trademark|last=Totilo|first=Stephen|work=Kotaku|access-date=2018-07-22|language=en-US}}</ref>
 +
 +
The trademark application for the Wii Remote was initially rejected by the [[United States Patent and Trademark Office]] after the trademark was filed in March 2008. The USPTO claimed that the word "[[Remote control|remote]]" is commonly used, and therefore should not be trademarked. The USPTO said they would accept Nintendo's trademark filing if the company disclaims exclusive rights to the word "remote" in the term and if the word “remote” would always precede the word “Wii” in marketing and manuals. The USPTO accepted the “Wii Remote” trademark in July 2012.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.engadget.com/2008/12/02/wee-bit-of-trouble-nintendo-cant-trademark-wii-remote/|title=Wee bit of trouble: Nintendo can't trademark 'Wii Remote'|work=Engadget|access-date=2018-08-29|language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://trademarks.justia.com/774/27/wii-77427250.html|title=WII REMOTE Trademark of Nintendo of America Inc. - Registration Number 4177430 - Serial Number 77427250 :: Justia Trademarks|website=trademarks.justia.com|language=en|access-date=2018-08-29}}</ref>
  
 
==Features==
 
==Features==

Please note that all contributions to Mod My Classic Wiki may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see Mod My Classic Wiki:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

Cancel Editing help (opens in new window)