Oops Nintendo did it again. This phrase couldn?t be more apt to what recently happened that involved the gaming giant, Nintendo. They?re being charged for patent infringement again. Nintendo is no stranger to these kind of things with a large number of their products.
They have been with this kind of trouble before with the 3DS because of its glassless 3D technology. They lost the battle in the court against a former Sony inventor who created 3D technology for the 3DS. They had to pay $15 million for the damages (it was supposed to be $30 million, but the judges thought it was too excessive).
Now, it?s Wii U?s time to shine (at least, in the courtroom, that is) as a company named Secure Access LLC is suing the giant gaming company, Nintendo of America, along with their distribution partners Target, Toys R Us, Walmart, Best Buy, Amazon and other unmentioned distributors. It was for ?unlawfully? distribution of Wii U which infringes a patented technology. Lawsuit details state that it was for its ? multi-screen personal computer display method and apparatus.?
As what most people who are carefully looking at this case thinks, it looks like a bad case of patent trolling. Here?s the content of the declaration:
?Secure Axcess LLC v Nintendo of America Inc. et al Case No. 2:14-cv-00284
Plaintiff Secure Axcess is a Texas limited liability company with an office located in Plano.
The defendants in the suit are Nintendo of America Inc., Nintendo Co. Ltd., Micro Electronics Inc., Hastings Entertainment Inc., Game Stop Corp., Wal-Mart Stores Inc., Wal-Mart Stores Texas LLC, Best Buy Stores LP, Bestbuy.com LLC, K Mart Corp., Target Corp., Toys ?R? Us-Delaware Inc. and Amazon.com Inc.
The defendants are accused of infringing on U.S. Patent No. 6,522,309 issued Feb. 18, 2003, for a Multiscreen Personal Computer Display Method and Apparatus. The alleged infringement occurs by the defendants selling Nintendo?s Wii U Console System without license or authorization.
The plaintiff is seeking compensatory damages, costs, interest and other relief. A jury trial is demanded.
The plaintiff is represented by James E. Davis of Ferguson Braswell & Fraser PC in Plano, Kelly Kubasta of Klemchuck Kubasta LLP in Dallas and Carl R. Roth of the Roth Law Firm in Marshall.
The case has been assigned to Judge Rodney Gilstrap.?
Image Source: YouTube