Nintendo has won a 15-year-old lawsuit against a third-party seller of Wii controllers, securing $8.2 million (€7 million) in damages, interest and legal fees.
As I noticed The games are fightingNintendo legal team in Germany confirmed that the judgment, handed down in late October, ordered BigBen Interactive (now Nacon) to pay damages and interest for infringing a European patent covering the Nintendo Wii controller.
While Nacon has the right to appeal, Nintendo's lawyers say the decision is “remarkable” given that damages proceedings are rare in German patent law, plus the court suggested that if not for BigBen's third-party hardware, Nintendo would have received 100% of those sales.
In 2011, a court had already ruled that BigBen had infringed Nintendo's patent, but BigBen argued that customers who did not buy its products would have chosen other third-party controllers. However, the court found that these third-party products were also “likely to infringe the patent at issue.”
“This decision brings to a close a trial at first instance that lasted more than seven years, illustrating the temporary difficulties associated with enforcing damages claims for patent infringement in Germany,” the lawyers wrote. “BigBen delayed the proceedings several times, for example by rejecting a court-appointed expert.
“This delaying tactic has now proven costly, with interest on the claim amounting to 5 percentage points above the base interest rate significantly increasing BigBen’s payment obligations and representing a significant portion of the total claim amount of just under €7 million.”
Nacon is appealing the decision.
Last month The head of the US patent office said he was reviewing the decision to grant Nintendo a patent. What advocates a common gameplay mechanic where an in-game character summons another supporting character to support them in battle. in one of two battle modes.
The shocking decision doesn't necessarily mean the award will be revoked immediately, but it does hint that USPTO Director John A. Squires is concerned about U.S. Patent No. 12,403,397, which could very well lead to its possible revocation.
