Oh well, guess Guitar Hero 4 will have to come with a Rickenbacher or an Ibanez now.. I vote for the disco ball guitar that spits smoke that Ace Frehely has.. Oh wait, that was a Gibson.. I know, Prince's 'male symbol' guitar would rock!!

GOLD5

@deathbunny: LOL that will piss him off, watch out, he'll write you an essay.

BrentW

@y2julio: [i4.photobucket.com]

mind in rewind

Gibson is jealous that Fender got in the good game. *waits for Rock Band Telecaster*

@dead_red_eyes: *looks at guitar list*

*faints*

mind in rewind

Epiphone are a lot cheaper than the real gibson. That said I have a LP standard Epiphone. Sounds great and plays even better.

Lack of quality is apparent though.

Fret inlays are no well put and are sometime not well placed. Electronics is a lot cheaper. And of course the body is plywood instead of real hardwood.

All in all I paid 500$ instead of 1200$ for a real Gibson.

JayTapp

@dead_red_eyes: Rock was built by gibson. Slash, Zakk Wylde, Jimmy Page, Ace Frehley, Angus Young and the list goes on.

y2julio

@BrentW: I'm saying that Gibson actually is a patent troll.

deathbunny

@badasscat: Your being to ridged in your definition, it's a word and I mean it to apply to the way that Gibson is behaving. i'm not saying that Gibson is actually a patent troll i'm saying that they are acting like one. I didn't actually read what you wrote there cause lets face it it's fucking long. I hope for your sake that you copy and pasted most of it.

BrentW

So many Gibson fanboys ... tsk tsk. Let's see your Gibson go up against my army.

Fender Jazzmaster (1965)
Fender Jaguar (1962)
Mosrite Ventures Mark I (1966)
Fender Telecaster Deluxe (1977)

dead_red_eyes

@Kuromankuro: Epiphone Les Pauls *are* Les Pauls, so you don't have to imagine anything. They're owned by Gibson, and they're fully licensed to carry the name, which no other company's guitars are. My wife has an Epi LP and there's no major qualitative difference between it and a Gibson - you're paying for the Gibson name when you buy a Gibson. (Well, that and the more expensive American labor.) They are probably the most overpriced guitars in the world.

Not to say Epi LP's are *exactly* the same as Gibson LP's, but they're no more different than one model Gibson LP is different than any other. Gibson makes a lot of LP's, in many different styles and price ranges, and all that really ties them together is the basic shape and the name "Les Paul". You're getting both with an Epi, and you're paying a lot less for about 95% the same guitar.

badasscat

@BrentW: No, what I'm arguing is that you understand neither what patents are nor what a patent troll is. Actually, I'm not arguing it, I'm stating it as a fact. Because that's what it is.

A company need not be producing an exact copy of another company's products for that company to be infringing on one or more patents. Patents protect individual ideas, not products.

Moreover, a company need not be producing *any* product to have a right to enforce its patents. That is in fact the whole *point* of patents, that these ideas are protected from those who would otherwise swoop in and take over a market from a little guy who might have come up with an idea but not yet had the resources to market it. (If patents didn't exist, for example, there would be no TiVo - because all the cable companies would have produced DVR's based on TiVo's ideas before they even made it to market.)

In this case, while Gibson is a privately owned company that does not release revenue or sales figures to the public, I think it's safe to say Activision dwarfs Gibson. Activision is the bully here; they're the ones releasing products without regard to whose ideas they're aping. Maybe they're Activision's ideas, maybe they're someone else's; Activision's stance is "who cares? We'll make more money fighting this than paying royalties". Gibson is taking a patent that they may or may not have had the resources to yet act upon and attempting to enforce it against a larger company that they believe stole their idea. This is what the patent system is *designed* to stop.

Patent trolls are companies that have no particular business model *other than* going around and trying to enforce patents that they had often submitted after those ideas have already been on the market - and often despite the obvious prior art. Gibson is hardly a patent troll. They're a guitar maker. And they have a patent on an idea that they think a larger company has used to make a potentially competing product. Whether or not they're right will be settled in court. I don't see anything so cut and dried about this as you do, other than the fact that you're absolutely wrong about the type of company Gibson is or what the patent system is intended to do.

badasscat

@Kuromankuro: They could go with Ibanez guitars.@kingross: I think Ibanez makes one of the finest basses out there. I love using their basses for latin music.

y2julio

@Kuromankuro: Epiphones are fine guitars. Theyre not made in America, but neither are Ibanez guitars and anyone that talks badly about them is a fool.

kingross

I can only hope that Activision does something right with Guitar Hero 4 and parters with BC Rich to make a Warlock controller.

kingross

oh, i thought for a minute you meant william gibson. never mind.

firesign

@FranUnFine: Think of it this way. Gibson and Activision started dating three years ago, and as such shared some things. Recently, Activision decided it wanted to start seeing other people and called it quits with Gibson.

Gibson, being the jilted lover, takes it rather poorly and storms back to Activision's home demanding it give them back their black t-shirt. And if they can't share Guitar Hero with Activision, then nobody will.

TRT-X

Stop acting like a Lil' Beyotch Gibson!!

Darksider1972

@neuralien: I know, I was saying that I'll have to get an Epiphone to imagine I'm playing a Les Paul. (I don't think that Epiphone is the greatest quality comparitively.)

Kuromankuro-R.I.P.-360 March_21st_2008----March_22nd_2008

And now, a dramatic re-enactment of the story thus far:

[SCENE: ACTIVISION and GIBSON are sitting at a dinner table in a pleasant, upscale restaurant. GIBSON has a slightly delirious look in its eyes; ACTIVISION fidgets nervously.]
ACTIVISION: Gib...
GIBSON: Yes, Vi?
ACTIVISION: I've been looking back at our relationship. We've been together for three years now...
GIBSON: Three wonderful years!
ACTIVISION: Uh, yeah. The more I look back--
GIBSON: We've made some wonderful music together!
ACTIVISION: It's been a great ride so far, yeah. And I've been wondering about our future together...
GIBSON: I d--
ACTIVISION: And I don't see one.
[Beat. If you play the scene in slow motion, you can see the exact frame in which GIBSON's heart breaks.]
ACTIVISION: Look, we've had our fun. Listen, it's not you, it's--
GIBSON: YOU HEARTLESS BASTARD! I've changed so much for you! All that plastic, that red dye job, the complete makeover last year, and, and, and after everything I've done for you, I can't believe--
ACTIVISION: --okay, fine, it IS you, you greedy bitch! I saw you and Nyko together in that seedy-looking little dive! I SAW YOU in that seedy little outfit, offering to play for both teams!
GIBSON: Well, I wouldn't have been there if I didn't see the way you slapped around Harmonix!
ACTIVISION: Harmonix deserved it! HARMONIX DESERVED IT!
GIBSON: Deserved to be cheated on with Neversoft? Deserved you lording it all over them when they wanted one small thing from you? You NEVER treat your partners right! You just string'em on and dump them when they're useless to you! I'll take you for everything you have, and maybe THEN you'll learn to treat them with a little respect!
ACTIVISION: Just you try, you little c[this post has been rated "T" for "Teen"]!

[SCENE: Judge Judy. GIBSON is wearing the trampiest, cleavage-baring-but-stupposed-to-look-modest dress ever, and ACTIVISION sporting some serious chin pubes, with some bags under its eyes.]
GIBSON: *sobbing*...and it was MINE! A-and i-it was mine...
ACTIVISION: Oh, that F[this post has been rated "T" for "Teen"]--

TO BE CONTINUED

LoopyChew

ow - what did the five fingers say to the face?

Gibson knows.

Chef

@badasscat: Now if you want to argue with me and say that Gibson already produces something like guitar hero, then, I guess I stand corrected.

BrentW

@Kuromankuro: Epiphone belongs to Gibson

neuralien

"Ouch, there's nothing worse than a jilted guitar manufacturer."

Except for the woman, scorned.

SycoKiller

@badasscat: I'm not sure that you understand what it means either, whether or not they produce an actual product is irrelevant, the point is that they don't actually produce the product that the patent is for. It seems that Gibson holds the patent for the specific reason of being able to sue someone if it infringes on the patent but never actually intends on producing a product that "simulates a concert" and here is a wikipedia definition if you are still confused "Enforces patents against purported infringers without itself intending to manufacture the patented product or supply the patented service"

BrentW

@VeritasVierge: I didn't see strings in any of the independent claims, but I quickly glossed over a lot of it. What I did see is an "audio signal" coming from the instrument as well as an "audio signal" coming from an audio track source, such as the actual music track on the DVD as transmitted by the DVD drive to the console. Clearly this "audio signal" is really an audio signal (as it encodes audio data), but it would be tough to argue that, somehow in the same line, the "signal" sent by the guitar is in any way an "audio signal," even by virtue of how it is manipulated.

Throtex

"beliguired"

Yikes. That is quite the misspelling. You know, Firefox has a built-in spell checker...

@BrentW: Not sure you understand what the term "patent troll" means. Gibson is a company that actually produces real products that they sell to customers. I'm no Gibson fan, but they don't fit any definition of "patent troll".

badasscat

As Activision noted in its filing, Gibson waited three years to make its patent allegations, and only did so after it became clear that Activision was not interested in renewing its marketing and support agreement with Gibson.

So does this mean that the next guitar hero game won't have gibsons in it? I started playing a real guitar because of guitar hero. I've been wanting to get a Gibson since GH came out, Still do. I certainly enjoyed pretending I was Playing a Les Paul in the game, now I guess I'll have to rely on Epiphone for that. Oh well, I guess Fenders will be in GH and Rock Band. (Unless they want to put Danelectro's or something else irrelevant in there.)

Kuromankuro-R.I.P.-360 March_21st_2008----March_22nd_2008

I so far have not seen any basis that Gibson are in the right.

RobTheBuilder

@hahnchen: Would now be a good time to point out that this is most definitely not a software patent?

Throtex

Whoever came up with the idea for dance mats should also jump on board the wagon and sue. If you place your guitar on the floor and use your feet to play, it's basically nothing more than a dance mat.

IronsUK

Beware of the Patent troll

BrentW

Welp. Looking forward to a Gibson-brand Guitar DLC pack for Rock Band.

Sgoast

@Throtex: I had looked it up when it first came up and I'm inclined to agree with Activision. The problem for Gibson is the patent says that the guitar would have strings which the Guitar Hero controllers lack among other differences. The idea of recording music and replaying it via a guitar is just too broad an idea to patent.

VeritasVierge

This is why software patents are bullshit. Gibson has no product to patent, just some whimsy, ill defined idea. The whole concept of software patent law in the US is ridiculous, and the difference between various states' implementation of it means the plaintiff will shop around his favourite courts, normally Eastern Texas district or Illinois, because no one else would take their shit.

How about patenting the use of crosshairs in games? How about patenting the very idea of a 3D engine? Oh wait, someone already tried that - [www.theregister.co.uk]

Thank fuck that Europe hasn't jumped aboard this patent lawyer's wetdream bandwagon yet.

hahnchen

You know what I don't get? First they license the likeness of their guitar to Activision for Guitar Hero games. And then, at some later point, they decide to feth them with a lawsuit.

I don't know about what you think, but I wouldn't want to deal with Gibson again.

Not that Activision would be the holiest of all companies (are there any at all?), but it still is rather reckless of Gibson.

FranUnFine

By the way, I think the key claim term here is "audio signals." The spec describes:

Effects processor 17 is of conventional design and will typically include electronically induced distortion, delay, and other special effects which electrically modify the audio signals generated by guitar 20.

I would say Gibson is estopped from arguing that the "audio signals" could be electronic button presses with no real correlation to an actual sound.

By the way, claim 13 looks like it would be at issue here. Anybody have the complaint up somewhere?

Throtex

"Gibson waited three years to make its patent allegations, and only did so after it became clear that Activision was not interested in renewing its marketing and support agreement with Gibson."

Ah, so that explains why Gibson would sue one of its biggest business partners.

ckranger11

Gibson needs to STFU and get back to making Guitars like they used to back in the old days. Right now they are way overpriced for the quality they are putting out.

y2julio

Patent No. 5,990,405 to Auten, et al., for those so inclined to actually look it up.

Looks like a heck of an uphill battle for Gibson. Even Activision's laches argument looks good here.

Throtex