Gibson and Activision Entering Legal Battle Over Guitar Hero
Let the lawsuits fly!
Last January, Gibson Guitar Inc., a leading guitar manufacturer, issued a letter to Activision Inc. stating that their Guitar Hero video games infringe on one of Gibson’s many patents.
According to Gibson, the games which make players press buttons on a guitar-shaped controller in sync with notes on a TV screen violates a patent filed in 1999. The patent in question shows how to combine a musical instrument, 3D headset with stereo speakers and a pre-recorded concert to simulate a live musical performance. Because of this, Gibson is now demanding that Activision should obtain a license from them.
Activision isn’t taking chances. Yesterday, they filed a lawsuit requesting the U.S. District Court for Central California to declare Gibson’s patent invalid and to prevent it from seeking damages. A copy of the letter sent by Gibson has been included in Activision’s lawsuit.
In a comment from Activision’s general counsel, George Rose, Activision isn’t doing this out of spite. According to him, “Gibson is a good partner, and we have a great deal of respect for them. We disagree with the applicability of their patent and would like a legal determination on this.”
Activision maintains that its games did not infringe on Gibson’s patent. In addition to that, they claim that by waiting for three years before raising its claim, Gibson had granted an implied license for the technology.
[Source: Reuters]
March 14th, 2008 at 7:21 am
i kinda doubt if it’s copyright infringement. those’re two completely different industries altogether!
March 19th, 2008 at 1:30 am
“…they filed a lawsuit requesting the U.S. District Court for Central California to declare Gibson’s patent invalid and to prevent it from seeking damages…”
Is it possible to request that some patent be declared invalid? Under what circumstances would such request be approved? Does that mean that getting something patent does not mean that you would be able to ‘patent’ it forever? Strange, at least to me.
I can understand the “…prevent it from seeking damages…” part and it makes sense. Like what speedy mentioned, they are two different industries. But if Activision did know that they would be using something that has been patent by Gibson, they should have given some credit to them. Actually, if your design appears in a game, it is some form of an advertisement, isnt it?