A Texas-based company has filed a lawsuit alleging that a group of game makers violated its patent related to voice recognition technology.

Filed on November 10 in the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas, plaintiff Bareis Technologies, LLC names Ubisoft, Inc. Sony Computer Entertainment America, Inc., Electronic Arts, Inc. and Disney Interactive Studios, Inc. The lawsuit revolves around a U.S. Patent for “Optical Disk Having Speech Recognition Templates for Information Access,” which Bareis owns.

The games specifically called out as infringing in the complaint are Ubi Soft’s Tom Clancy’s Rainbow Six: Lockdown, Tom Clancy’s Rainbow Six 3, Tom Clancy’s Rainbow Six 3: Black Arrow, Tom Clancy’s Rainbow Six Vegas, Tom Clancy’s Rainbow Six Vegas 2, Tom Clancy’s Ghost Recon Jungle Storm, Tom Clancy’s Ghost Recon 2 Summit Strike, Tom Clancy’s Ghost Recon 2, and Tom Clancy’s EndWar, SCEA’s SoCom: U.S. Navy SEALs, SoCom II: U.S. Navy SEALs, SoCom III: U.S. Navy SEALs, SoCom Combined Assault, EA’s NASCAR 06 and NASCAR 07 and Disney’s Phonics Quest.

The plaintiff is seeking a jury trial and “all damages caused by the infringement of the ‘407 patent, which by statute can be no less than a reasonable royalty.”

A disabled, visually-impaired gamer has filed suit against Sony Corporation of America, Sony Computer Entertainment America and Sony Online Entertainment claiming that the defendants are denying people with disabilities equal access to their goods and services.

The suit was filed by plaintiff Alexander Stern on October 23 in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. Stern seeks to “put an end to systemic civil rights violations” allegedly perpetrated by the defendants.

Stern claims to have sent both physical and electronic mail to officials at Sony requesting “minor modifications” that would remove the barrier to gaming for disabled people. In the complaint, Stern says that a Sony representative told him that “Sony would not offer any modifications whatsoever for persons with disabilities.”

Among other actions, Stern is seeking an injunction to prohibit Sony from violating the Americans with Disabilities Act, a declaration that Sony owns, operates and maintains equipment that discriminates against the disabled, unspecified damages and to have his lawyer’s fees and expenses paid for.

The plaintiff added in the complaint that games such as World of Warcraft do support access by disabled and/or visually impaired people by “providing visual cues through several simple third-party modifications.” Stern notes that other accessibility features are available and have been implemented by “companies whose resources pale in comparison with Sony’s.”

The suit also names “Does 1 through 10,” as the plaintiff “does not presently know the true names and capacities of the defendants.”


|Via GameSpot|

A California gamer whose lawsuit against Sony Computer Entertainment America was tossed out of court last month has filed an appeal.

Resistance: Fall of Man player Erik Estavillo originally filed a complaint against SCEA on July 6th of this year, alleging that Sony suppressed his free speech rights by banning him from the PlayStation Network. Estavillo further claimed that disabling his account amounted to a theft of his PSN pre-paid points and that SCEA was unable to stop users under 17 years of age from playing.

A judge dismissed Estavillo’s lawsuit on September 22, 2009, ruling that there was no plausible First Amendment claim for relief.

The appeal was filed on October 19 in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

Update: Estavillo also filed (on October 14th) a civil lawsuit against SCEA in Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara seeking $180,000.

Estavillo tells GP he is representing himself in these cases and, in light of his PSN ban, is playing the Wii (Metroid Trilogy) and Xbox 360 (Mortal Kombat vs. DC Universe). Estavillo said that he loves playing as The Joker in the latter title and may be “a bit obsessed” with the character, adding, “I plan to wear a purple suit during my court trials. No joke!”

Following a PlayStation 3 system software update that rendered his console unusable, and a $150 fee from the manufacturer to fix it, a Florida man has filed a class action suit against Sony Computer Entertainment America.

John Kennedy v. SCEA was filed on October 3, 2009 in the San Francisco Division of the Northern District Court of California. The plaintiff alleges that he purchased a PS3 unit on January 8, 2009 before installing the fatal update (Firmware 3.0) in September of 2009.  The suit notes that while “as a general rule, Sony ‘encourages’ PS3 owners to install the latest version of system software, Sony required users to install the Firmware 3.0 update.”

Kennedy added that a Sony forum featured “many” complaints about console failures due to the Firmware, enough that Sony responded with a “Firmware 3.00 Q&A” FAQ.  Also stated is the fact that Sony released a 3.01 version of the update a little over two weeks after the release of 3.0 in order to “improve system stability,” but which, according to the complaint, “not only failed to address problems introduces by Firmware 3.0, it caused new problems,” including the malfunctioning of the PS3’s Blu-Ray drive.

Courthouse News, via Gamasutra, has the full complaint in PDF form.

The case of a gamer who sued Sony Computer Entertainment America (SCEA) over being banned from the PlayStation Network has been tossed out of court.

After being banned for “multiple violations” on PSN, the Resistance: Fall of Man player Erik Estavillo had sued SCEA for violating his First Amendment rights (for the PSN ban) and for money he had invested into the PSN Wallet Fund. He sought $55,000 and an injunction that would limit SCEA from banning any players in any form on the network.

Northern District of California District Judge Ronald M Whyte ruled that there was no plausible First Amendment claim for relief stated and dismissed the case.

The Technology & Marketing Law Blog (via Gamasutra) zeroed in on one specific comment of Whyte’s, that “Sony's Network is not similar to a company town.” Blogger Eric Goldman wrote:

…this opinion emphatically rejects a meme that has become pretty popular among virtual world exceptionalists. Some exceptionalists have favored the company town analogy because it enable virtual world customers to reduce an operator's ability to run its business capriciously.

A PDF version of the Order Granting Defendant's Motion To Dismiss is also available on the aforementioned blog.

PalTalk Holdings Inc. of Jericho, New York has filed a patent lawsuit against a slew of massively multiplayer online videogame makers.

Filed on September 14 of this year, the suit targets Sony Computer Entertainment America, Sony Online Entertainment, Sony Corporation of America, Sony Corporation, Activision Blizzard, Inc., NCSoft Corporation, Jagex Limited and Turbine, Inc.

PalTalk alleges that the defendants all use PalTalk technology in an unauthorized and infringing manner and says it has “suffered damages in at least the tens of million of dollars” at the hands of each defendant. The company is seeking a jury trial.

In 2002 PalTalk purchased patented technology from HearMe that allows "efficient handling of communications between players necessary to maintain a consistent game environment for all players,” covering a “number of aspects of online gaming, including communications through a group messaging server.”

The case was filed in Eastern District of Texas Marshall Division, a region, according to Boston.com, known for being “plaintiff-friendly.” The site also notes that a similar lawsuit by PalTalk against Microsoft in 2006, for use of its technology in the Halo series, resulted in the software giant eventually licensing PalTalk’s technology.

GP has the full 16-page complaint in PDF form for your perusal here.

Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) President Patricia Vance used her PlayStation blog to reveal that Sony has embedded an ESRB Video Game Ratings Guide directly on its PSPgo.

The guide offers a walk through of ratings categories and descriptors, along with a tutorial for setting up parental controls on Sony’s new handheld.

Outspoken God of War designer David Jaffe posted a video rant against used game sales on Saturday, but apparently removed it from YouTube the following day.

We caught up to Jaffe's video yesterday morning while scanning our daily RSS intake (left). By late afternoon when we checked back to gather some quotes for this article, it was gone. In its place was a YouTube message reading, "This video has been removed by the user."

A short time later, when we looked again, we couldn't even access his blog. A system message from Blogger read: "This blog is open to invited readers only."

It's unclear why Jaffe's video was taken offline or why he locked his blog. While Jaffe's video argument against used game sales was punctuated by occasional f-bombs, that's not unusual for his freewheeling commentaries. Prior to being locked, readers of Jaffe's blog were engaged in a lively response to his video, both pro and con.

The used game issue is a passionate one indeed, and Jaffe has addressed it previously on his blog. For his part, Jaffe takes the standard industry line that games are bad for developers and publishers. In the deleted video, he said (we're paraphrasing from memory here) that he didn't begrudge consumers the right to buy used games, but that game creators deserved a cut of used game sales. He said that some have defended used game sales by comparing buying a used game to buying a used car. However, Jaffe said that was a bad analogy because while playing a used game is the same experience as playing a new game, driving a used car is a different experience from driving a new one.

GP: Hmmm... We tried to reach Jaffe via Twitter to ask him about the missing video, but it appears that his Twitter account is no longer active. We hope that Jaffe has not decided to stop interacting with gamers. While we don't always agree with his rants, they are provocative and entertaining.

PlayStation 3 manufacturer Sony gamed the product registration system of the Federal Communications Commission, according to PS3 News.

Yesterday, of course, Sony announced that it was dropping the price of the PlayStation 3 to $299 and introducing a slimmed-down, 120GB version on September 1st. Digging through FCC records, PS3 News discovered filings for a 200GB PS3 registered to Sand Dollar Enterprises of San Mateo, California:

Now, Sand Dollar Enterprise, Inc is represented by SCEA's General Council, Riley Russell.

This house is actually a private residence, but whomever lives here filed the documents with the FCC, most likely on the behalf of Sony, as they would be much harder to find with a different FCC ID (XCE) than that of Sony (AK8).

This means that some time in the future (for probably a premium, maybe $349 or so), a new PS3 Slim may come out featuring a 250GB HDD. There is not much of a difference, but expect it to be bundled with a game or so, right in time for Christmas!

A PlayStation 3 gamer has filed suit in U.S. District Court in California, alleging that SCEA suppressed his free speech rights and caused him pain and suffering by banning his account on the PlayStation Network.

In a complaint filed on July 6th, Erik Estavillo of San Jose writes that he his disabled by a variety of disorders; among these are agoraphobia, a fear of crowds:

The pain and suffering was caused by the defendant, Sony, banning the plaintiff's account on the PlayStation 3 Network, in which the plaintiff relies on to socialize with other people, since it's the only way the plaintiff can truly socialize since he also suffers from Agoraphobia...

Estavillo's issues with SCEA apparently stem from his play of the PS3 hit Resistance: Fall of Man:

The ban is supposedly due to the behavior of the plaintiff when he plays the video game "Resistance: Fall of Man," which Sony owns and employs moderators for its online play. These moderators kick and ban players that they feel are deserving; though their biases to a player seem to be what determines the kick or ban...

 

The plaintiff was exercising his First Amendment Rights to Freedom of Speech in the game's public forum when he was banned from, not only [Resistance], but also banned from playing all other games online via the PlayStation Network...

Estavillo also claims that the PSN ban amounts to a theft of his pre-paid points:

The plaintiff...cannot access [his] money when a moderator from Resistance and Sony gives a player a arbitrary wide-range ban... which in essence, is stealing money from the player...

Estavillo also argues that the EULA for online play of Resistance is ineffective in blocking players under the game's recommended age of 17, although it's unclear how this fits into his claim.

In his request to the court, Estavillo, who appears to be unrepresented, asks that SCEA be enjoined from banning players. He also seeks $55,000 in punitive damages.

To date, SCEA has not filed a response with the Court. GamePolitics has requested comment on the lawsuit from SCEA.

DOCUMENT DUMP: Grab a copy of Estavillo vs. SCEA here...

The PlayStation 3 may be struggling in major consumer markets, but Middle Eastern gamers apparently love Sony's Blu-Ray equipped console.

Emirates Business 24/7 reports that the Middle East enjoys the highest level of PS3 sales among developing countries. SCEE exec Jim Ryan commented:

The PS3... has a strong market in the Middle East. The sales have been disproportionately strong in the Middle East and Africa... and parts of Asia, especially in the May-June-July period.

At least 20,000 to 25,000 PS3s have been sold in developing countries this year and 80 per cent of that was in the Middle East... In other emerging countries such as Iran and Africa it's entry-level machines like the PS2 which... are moving fast.

The high summer temperatures, combined with the economic downturn, have encouraged [Middle Eastern] users to stay at home, which is another major driver of sales.

Despite the PS3's relative success, gamers in the Middle Eastern market shouldn't expect much in the way of culturally familiar games on the system, Ryan said:

Without too much of Arabic content in games, sales figures are positive. Unless gaming companies see big returns from the localisation or Arabisation of content there will be no investment made on that front.

Emirates Business 24/7 reports that the total Middle Eastern gaming market for systems and software is $750,000 million, with at least a third of that amount controlled by Sony.

Developers of Sony's upcoming God of War III are concerned that the game's graphic violence may prompt a ban on sales of the game in the Australian market, reports Digital Life.

Australian censors have historically been tough on games featuring extreme violence. That's largely due to the lack of an R18+ rating Down Under. With Australia's highest rating currently at MA15+, any game not suitable for a 15-year-old is refused classification.

GoW III art director Sean Cunningham commented on the design team's worries over the game's Australian rating:

There is (concern). We try to push the boundaries a little bit. (But) we’ve had meetings and discussions and internally we all have a good gauge on what’s 'too far'.

You throw something past [content rating boards] and they might say 'Absolutely not! You could not do that!' and we’re all like: 'Aww, c’mon, that was a great idea!' There have been a couple of those…

Also visually, everyone’s really excited. The disembowelment of the centaur, ripping Helios’s head off, the reaction from the floor has been amazing. Everybody in the studio is very happy....

God of War III is due in 2010. As the first GoW game to appear on the PlayStation 3, the visual quality of its violent scenes will certainly be more intense than those found in the franchise's PS2 games.

Via: Kotaku

Thanks to: Australian GamePolitics reader Ryan for the tip!

Wedbush-Morgan analyst Michael Pachter has publicly apologized for saying that Sony was "ripping off the consumer" by setting a $249 price point on the PSP Go. The eminently quotable Pachter made the damning comment about the new handheld last week during an E3 segment of Bonus Round.

Apparently thinking better of his words in the interim, Pachter penned an apology yesterday as he debuted a new monthly column for IndustryGamers:

I sincerely regret the choice of words... where I said that Sony is "ripping off" the consumer by pricing the PSP Go at $249.99. I made a poor choice of words, and I do NOT think that Sony is doing anything nefarious in choosing their pricing strategy.

 

The company has the right to price its products at a point that they think is competitive, and has no obligation to sell products at lower than a competitive price. They have been subsidizing purchases of the PS3 since launch, to the tune of 22 million sold at a loss of $100 or more apiece (on average), so if they are able to make a profit on the PSP Go, more power to them. They are pricing at a point that positions the PSP Go competitively with the iPod Touch, and the PSP Go arguably has much more value than the Apple product. Notwithstanding my view that the price point is too high to generate more than a few million units sold, I really think my comment was unfair, and would appreciate your allowing me to clear the air...

GP: Pachter is a straight shooter and, apology notwithstanding, I believe he was speaking from the heart when he made his original comment. It's not too much of a stretch to imagine that there were a few angry phone calls from Sony HQ to Pachter between the airing of the "rip off" remark and yesterday's mea culpa.

But the fact is, Pachter got it right. Why does the PSP Go, which does away with the UMD drive assembly, cost $80 more than the current PSP-3000? There's no good reason, and gamers knew that even before Pachter spoke out. From the moment it was announced at E3, the PSP Go's $249 price point went over like the proverbial lead balloon.

Nor do I think much of the PS3 justification floated by Pachter in his retraction. Sony is losing money on the PS3, certainly, but that's no excuse to try to make a few million back by skinning consumers with the PSP Go. Personally, I love my PS3. But if Sony overdid the hardware, over-estimated their market and totally screwed up the worldwide launch, that's on them.

For an industry that's supposed to be all about fun, the video game biz is tightly managed from a P.R. standpoint. Not too many people speak their mind publicly or wander too far off message.

That's why we enjoy Mike Pachter, who tracks the industry for Wedbush-Morgan. The guy may not always be right, but he always says what he thinks.

And when Pachter says the $249 PSP Go announced at E3 is "ripping off the consumer," we must agree. The analyst, who was otherwise complimentary toward Sony's E3 presentation, slammed PSP Go pricing to host Geoff Keighley on an E3 edition of Bonus Round:

$249 is too much. Period... The [current] $169 PSP-3000 is a profitable device - the disc assembly, for a UMD, costs more than 16 gigs of flash does. So this new device doesn't cost them as much to make as the PSP-3000 and they jack the price up $80...

 

I'm sorry to say it. I don't want to get bad fan mail from the Sony fanboys, but... They're ripping off the consumer until they sell a couple million and if consumers don't buy it then the price is going to come down... they're making a lot more money on the PSP Go than the PSP-3000. And the PSP Go helps them because there's no piracy...

Maybe I like Pachter because his take on the PSP Go echoes my own. Here's what I tweeted about the system during Sony's E3 press conference last week:

Kaz [Hirai] is holding up PSP Go, but sez PSP 3000 won't go away...

Kaz PSP Go $249... Too much. Sense Me feature will match ur PSP music to ur mood. Um, thank you, no...

 

[Jack] Tretton: Resident Evil Portable. Let's hope that's a working title. LBP for PSP looks sweet. Crowd not really into PSP news, tho.

Via: Joystiq

This black Acura with California plate SEGA was spotted outside the Shrine Auditorium in L.A. on Tuesday prior to Sony's E3 press event.

I've no idea who was driving or whether it is a corporate or personal ride. I can say that there was a person behind the wheel, not a hedgehog...

Angered by Sony's failure to recall a PlayStation 2 game which they find offensive, a group of Hindu leaders have called for a worldwide boycott on Sony products. The move comes on the eve of Sony's E3 press conference here in Los Angeles on Tuesday.

As GamePolitics has reported in recent weeks, Rajan Zed (left), a Hindu leader who lives in the United States, is spearheading the protest against Hanuman: Boy Warrior. In addition to Zed, today's announcement identifies seven other Hindu leaders from Australia, India and the U.S. Zed and the others believe Hanuman is an affront to the Hindu faith and they recently threatened to call for a boycott if Sony did not pull the game from the market. Today's announcement signals that Sony has not given in to their demands.

A press release issued earlier today announced the boycott, citing what the group calls the "stiff-necked attitude of Sony officials":

Vexed by stiff-necked attitude of Sony officials, various Hindu groups have given worldwide boycott call against Sony PlayStation products...

 

Zed, who is president of Universal Society of Hinduism, in an earlier statement, said that in a video game set-up, the player controlled the destiny of Lord Hanuman while in reality the believers put the destinies of themselves in the hands of their deities...

 

Hindu leaders communicated their displeasure to Sony and tried to resolve the issue through discussions, but callous attitude of Sony officials frustrated their efforts, leaving them with no other alternative except the boycott call.

It is unclear what impact the call for a boycott might have. Hanuman is the first console game developed entirely by an Indian firm.

For the past several weeks some Hindu leaders have been urging Sony to withdraw Hanuman: Boy Warrior from the market.

The recently-released PlayStation 2 game, available only in the Indian market, is also the first console title to be entirely developed by an Indian firm. Some Hindus, however, are upset by the game's depiction of Lord Hanuman, one of the religion's deities.

To date, the protest - largely waged via e-mail - has been led by Rajan Zed, the Nevada-based president of Universal Society of Hinduism. In a press release issued last evening, Zed upped the ante by raising the possibility of a worldwide Hindu boycott of Sony products. Zed has given Sony until May 21st to respond:

Hindus upset over Sony’s “Hanuman: Boy Warrior” videogame and further frustrated by the callous handling by Sony officials, might give a boycott call of all Sony products world over... despite communication between Sony officials and Hindu leaders, the issue had not been resolved yet. Sony officials said that they would look into it and be back with the Hindu leaders, but they were yet to hear back from Sony...

 

If nothing was heard by Hindu leaders from Sony by May 21, then all the protesting Hindu groups and leaders would re-evaluate the protest and announce the future course, which might include calling for boycott of Sony products world over by Hindus and other likeminded people and supporters...

GP: It is unclear whether Rajan Zed and the other Hindu leaders involved in the protest to date have the clout to bring a meaningful boycott about against Sony. Also unclear is how well Hanuman is selling in India. The game has received some withering reviews.

Hindu groups protesting the recent release of Hanuman: Boy Warrior for the PlayStation 2 have apparently run out of patience with Sony.

As GamePolitics reported last week, U.S.-based Hindu leader Rajan Zed said that Sony was looking into claims that the game, released only in India, is offensive to Hindus.

However a press release issued by Zed earlier this week seems to indicate that Sony will not intervene in Hanuman's distribution. Bhavna Shinde of Forum for Hindu Awakening (also based in the United States) is quoted in the release:

So now we are left with no other alternative except to intensify our protests. Lord Hanuman is a highly revered Deity for us Hindus and we cannot accept any more denigration of Him...

 

We are shocked at the stubbornness of Sony Corporation not to withdraw the PlayStation2 game 'Hanuman: Boy Warrior' despite our repeated requests. Sony Corporation is held in high esteem the world over with high ethical principles. We were expecting that Sony would not hurt the feelings of the one billion strong Hindu population for a minor product like this game.

Although Hanuman is the first console game developed completely in India, it has received very poor reviews from Indian gaming sites.

The U.S.-based Hindu leader who initiated what has turned into a multinational Hindu protest against a PlayStation 2 game sold in India claims that Sony has agreed to look into the issue.

As GamePolitics reported last week, Rajan Zed (left) criticized Hanuman: Boy Warrior for trivializing the Hindu faith. The game was developed by an Indian firm, Aurona Technologies Limited.

In a press release issued earlier today Zed writes:

Replying to the communiqué of Bhavna Shinde of Forum for Hindu Awakening, Keita Sanekata of Sony Electronics Inc wrote, “We will review this issue, and get back to you as soon as possible.”
 
Advancing the protest spearheaded by acclaimed Hindu statesman Rajan Zed, Shinde earlier wrote Sanekata to “look into withdrawing this game and publishing an apology, so as to prevent further denigration of our Deity Sree Hanuman and intensifying of our protests..."

Zed is president of Universal Society of Hinduism, a group which also apparently protested the 2008 Mike Meyer film The Love Guru.

Yesterday GamePolitics broke the news that a New Jersey inventor has sued Sony, PDP/Electro Source and several of the firms' attorneys, alleging that he was hoodwinked in a complex patent litigation deal.

One of the central issues in the case is a $150,000 payment made by PDP/Electrosource to the Plaintiff, Craig Thorner. While PDP/Electrosource negotiated the deal with Thorner, who had no attorney, Sony actually funneled the money to PDP. It's complicated, but both companies appear to have believed that acquiring an option on force feedback controller patents developed by Thorner would gain them an advantage in high stakes patent litigation involving Immersion, Corp. It certainly didn't help Sony, which suffered an $82 million judgment in the case.

If the deal sounds a little shady to you, U.S. District Court Judge Claudia Wilken, who presided over Immersion vs. Sony, apparently thought so, too. GamePolitics has obtained a partial transcript of a November, 2005 hearing in which she sharply questions Sony attorneys about the $150,000 payment to Thorner:

Judge: ...What money of Electrosource's went from Electrosource to Mr. Thorner in consideration for that license agreement?

Sony Attorney #1: ...if you're asking what money Electrosource paid above and beyond the amount that Sony paid...

Judge: ...$150,000 moved to... Mr. Thorner. That $150,000 was from Sony. That was Sony's money, correct?

Sony Attorney #1: ...I don't want to split hairs... Sony paid $150,000 to Electrosource. And in exchange Sony became a third-party beneficiary under the Electrosource/Thorner license...

Judge: Wait. Wait. Help me out a little bit here... $150,000 moves from Sony through Electrosource formally... to Mr. Thorner?

Sony Attorney #1: ...[Sony] felt it was highly beneficial to have Electrosource negotiate with Mr. Thorner because if Mr. Thorner was speaking to Sony directly, perhaps he would ask for a much, much higher number, which was the belief...

Judge: And Sony's incapable of saying no?

Sony Attorney #1:...As far as that transaction goes, it's an absolutely legitimate transaction for Sony. They would have - if they got sued, they would have paid 50 times more in legal fees alone...

Judge: So in this deal, Electrosource parts with none of its own money... and it gets this license agreement on very favorable terms... and Sony chooses to use this very oblique route to get this option on a license because Sony's afraid that Mr. Thorner's going to stick them up for a whole bunch more money?...

Sony Attorney #2: Your honor, this is like a huge win for lawyers to get for Sony this kind of option at this price. It's ridiculous.

Judge: Why didn't they write it down in a clear way... Look, this is a huge corporation supposedly getting something important to it, going through this strange process through arguably incompetent lawyers... They set themselves up for a fight... they set themselves up for litigation... and Mr. Thorner is going to make Sony in that fight pay a heck of a lot more than $150,000 to win... It's Sony's position that Mr. Thorner had no idea where the money was coming from?

Sony Attorney #2: Absolutely...

Judge: So the idea was to trick Mr. Thorner into a [patent licensing] commitment to Sony that Mr. Thorner sort of didn't know about or didn't fully grasp....

Sony Attorney #2: ....So this is one of the cheapest insurance policies - I'm doing this over 40 years - that I've ever seen gotten for a client...

GP: As Law.com reports, five months after this hearing Judge Wilkins would rule against Sony's motion to set aside Immersion's huge win. Her assessment that sleazy business was afoot is unmistakeable:

[Judge Wilkins ruled that]Thorner was an unreliable witness and that there was strong evidence -- supported by testimony and internal Sony documents -- that Sony paid $150,000 for Thorner's testimony.