The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
How very interesting. Sony have been slapped with a $90.7million fine, and have been told to "Withdraw PS2 consoles from the US market". This will not take place until an appeal is heard, but it could be bad news for a certain company...
[URL]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4387045.stm[/URL]
[URL]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4387045.stm[/URL]
Page:
;D
I guess...
Sony should know better.
Oh well.
Sony should know better.
Oh well.
No they're a so-so band.
Hedfix wrote:
> Strafio wrote:
> >
> The thing is, I don't think that Sony actually copied these people.
> I
> reckon they develloped it independantly for a purpose while these
> mongtards just churn out patents hoping to earn something out of
> someone else's hard work.
>
> But for all we know these people could be completely decent.
>
> It's Sony's fault for not checking previous patents properly, and if
> they created it first but didn't patent it and somebody else did then
> that's very stupid too and they deserve what they get.
Ha! Eat that Fony!
> Strafio wrote:
> >
> The thing is, I don't think that Sony actually copied these people.
> I
> reckon they develloped it independantly for a purpose while these
> mongtards just churn out patents hoping to earn something out of
> someone else's hard work.
>
> But for all we know these people could be completely decent.
>
> It's Sony's fault for not checking previous patents properly, and if
> they created it first but didn't patent it and somebody else did then
> that's very stupid too and they deserve what they get.
Ha! Eat that Fony!
Strafio wrote:
>
> The thing is, I don't think that Sony actually copied these people. I
> reckon they develloped it independantly for a purpose while these
> mongtards just churn out patents hoping to earn something out of
> someone else's hard work.
But for all we know these people could be completely decent.
It's Sony's fault for not checking previous patents properly, and if they created it first but didn't patent it and somebody else did then that's very stupid too and they deserve what they get.
>
> The thing is, I don't think that Sony actually copied these people. I
> reckon they develloped it independantly for a purpose while these
> mongtards just churn out patents hoping to earn something out of
> someone else's hard work.
But for all we know these people could be completely decent.
It's Sony's fault for not checking previous patents properly, and if they created it first but didn't patent it and somebody else did then that's very stupid too and they deserve what they get.
Walrus wrote:
> Hedfix:
> >Nintendo stood their ground and when it came to court they found
> the studio had neglected to copyright the name King Kong in the first
> place.
>
> The people at that studio must have been either quite thick or so
> blinded by there will to get some money that they thought it was
> worth the risk.
>
> Or maybe they were all retards.
It was the 80s. They made a lucrative profit out of bullying companies to settle out of court over 'supposed' copyright issues.
> Hedfix:
> >Nintendo stood their ground and when it came to court they found
> the studio had neglected to copyright the name King Kong in the first
> place.
>
> The people at that studio must have been either quite thick or so
> blinded by there will to get some money that they thought it was
> worth the risk.
>
> Or maybe they were all retards.
It was the 80s. They made a lucrative profit out of bullying companies to settle out of court over 'supposed' copyright issues.
Hedfix wrote:
> Ha ha!
>
> Strafio you're insane!
>
> If you had a good idea that you created and registered would you want
> to get your rewards for your work or would you do nothing when a big
> compnay copied your ideas and offered you nothing for them?
The thing is, I don't think that Sony actually copied these people. I reckon they develloped it independantly for a purpose while these mongtards just churn out patents hoping to earn something out of someone else's hard work.
But Hedfix also wrote:
> You do know sony tried to prove the owned the bond licence a while
> back?
>
> Sony are very good at ripping things off, stealing innovative ideas
> and generally takeing the pee.
That IS a point.
I heard that when Micheal Jackson gave them the Beatles lisciences as insurance for the money he owed them that they've been trying to destroy him ever since in order to own them.
I guess I have little sympathy for Sony.
> Ha ha!
>
> Strafio you're insane!
>
> If you had a good idea that you created and registered would you want
> to get your rewards for your work or would you do nothing when a big
> compnay copied your ideas and offered you nothing for them?
The thing is, I don't think that Sony actually copied these people. I reckon they develloped it independantly for a purpose while these mongtards just churn out patents hoping to earn something out of someone else's hard work.
But Hedfix also wrote:
> You do know sony tried to prove the owned the bond licence a while
> back?
>
> Sony are very good at ripping things off, stealing innovative ideas
> and generally takeing the pee.
That IS a point.
I heard that when Micheal Jackson gave them the Beatles lisciences as insurance for the money he owed them that they've been trying to destroy him ever since in order to own them.
I guess I have little sympathy for Sony.
Hedfix:
>Nintendo stood their ground and when it came to court they found the studio had neglected to copyright the name King Kong in the first place.
The people at that studio must have been either quite thick or so blinded by there will to get some money that they thought it was worth the risk.
Or maybe they were all retards.
>Nintendo stood their ground and when it came to court they found the studio had neglected to copyright the name King Kong in the first place.
The people at that studio must have been either quite thick or so blinded by there will to get some money that they thought it was worth the risk.
Or maybe they were all retards.
There's similar thing in Nintendo's history.
The owners of King Kong went after Nintendo because of Donkey Kong. Normally companies settled out of court with the big film companies law division because they feared it. Nintendo stood their ground and when it came to court they found the studio had neglected to copyright the name King Kong in the first place.
It's in the book 'Game Over'.
The owners of King Kong went after Nintendo because of Donkey Kong. Normally companies settled out of court with the big film companies law division because they feared it. Nintendo stood their ground and when it came to court they found the studio had neglected to copyright the name King Kong in the first place.
It's in the book 'Game Over'.
Mumbai Duck wrote:
> Cooky and I were talking about retarded patents a couple of weeks ago,
> before he died*.
> Apparantly someone tried to sue the makers of King Kong for breach of
> some patent.
> It turned out the people bringing the case didn't even hold the
> patent for the idea themselves.
Yeah, there was a big feature in NGC about that a few issues back. Made me laugh.
> Cooky and I were talking about retarded patents a couple of weeks ago,
> before he died*.
> Apparantly someone tried to sue the makers of King Kong for breach of
> some patent.
> It turned out the people bringing the case didn't even hold the
> patent for the idea themselves.
Yeah, there was a big feature in NGC about that a few issues back. Made me laugh.
Page: