Gibson just got pissed that Activision wants to see other guitar companies, dug out some old patent, sued them, and realized that it would seem strange if they didn't also sue EA and MTV, so they did it to them too.

Rock Band and Guitar Hero are in the clear for the following reasons:
1) They don't use real guitars.
2) They don't use any sound creation or mixing devices.
3) They don't use pre-recorded visuals.

If Gibson is smart, they'll drop it before it's too late.

ddrussianinja

@Edgehopper: Awesome. Thank you so much for those links. I was reading through these comments wondering if anyone had taken a look at the patent in question and seeing that last paragraph:
"If you haven't had much experience with patent law, this is the only real
infringement analysis that matters. It doesn't matter whether the device looks
like the pictures in the patent, or whether Activision intended to copy Gibson's
idea, or anything like that. All that matters for the purposes of patent
infringement liability is whether the device Gibson is using matches every
element of a claim in the patent. Because the Guitar Hero system doesn't match
every element of the claim, it doesn't infringe, period"
...sealed the deal.

Interesting to note, though, that if the guitar controllers had been created to emit an audio sound that was picked up by a microphone (anywhere), the claim would be valid.

Too bad for Gibson, but, seriously, what the fuck were they really trying to accomplish here?

FatalisticDread

@Edgehopper: Thanks for that information. From what I read, Gibson is likely to be denied.

mitch079

See here and here for some actual analysis from a law student specializing in patent law. Gibson is in the wrong here, but most of the arguments as to which side has merit in this thread have no basis in law or fact. The real patent is posted at the above links.

Edgehopper

Once Gibson goes and sues "Big K" (Konami), prepare for a massive legal clusterfuck, since Konami managed to use its legal muscle to stop and assimilate In The Groove as well as wipe out other competition like EZ2DJ. Believe me, Gibson doesn't want to face the unholy wrath of what happens when "sue the bastards" goes horribly wrong.

thelegendofzaku

yeah,gibson is gonna owe 2 million dollers to every sap that had jury duty that day and had to lissin to this crap-o-la

thats_that

Why would they sue over Rockband? Rockband had nothing to do with Gibson.

SnprSlick

From what I've heard Gibson is very litigous, regularly using the threat of lawsuits to intimidate other companies. My guess: they saw how popular GH/RB had become and how much money they were raking in and thought: 'huh, we make guitars. they use controllers that look like guitars. Maybe we can find some bullshit patent that doesn't really quite cover what they're doing but will scare them, like we've scared so many others, into giving us some of that money.'

Activision/EA, being the two largest videogame companies in the world with more lawyers than God, didn't cave, as they shouldn't, and now we have this. I would personally love to see Gibson's ass handed to them, with a possible countersuit to rub salt into their wounds. Don't fuck with my Rock Band, assholes.

ca$h

@Sinnbox:
Wait a minute, playing Guitar Hero ISN'T JUST LIKE PLAYING A GUITAR?

I've been living a lie! WHERE CAN I BUY A LES PAUL?!

strobefx

KONAMI WILL SUE!!!!!!

tme2nsb

I don't expect this case to get very far unless they have a very specific patent (and I'd love to see someone actually post the REAL patent(s) being discussed), simply because EA and Activision won't be ill affected by a long, protracted legal battle the way most patent trolling victims would be.

That said, this is exactly the reason patent law needs serious reform with regards to computer software.

RawSteelUT

@SycoKiller: That may be, but this is a dick move on Gibson's part reguardless of who it's against. And I do loves me somes rock band.

LowNemesis

@jonathan:
For the publicity? You mean more publicity than having the guitars in the game?

rvcontre

@jayntampa:
"IP rights is the cornerstone of pretty much every creative endeavor."
WTF ?
The cornerstone of any creative endeavor is called IMAGINATION. IP rights is just one of the ways to make money out of it, and not necessarily the best one.

Franssu

Patent squatter scum need to be stoned!

The whole patent office needs to be retired or heavy changes need to be done because all its doing is stifling innovation and creativity.

Magnum1024k

@Sunjammer: What, specifically, is vague in the patent claims? Broad != vague, by the way.

@Sinnbox: If you could, you (or someone else) would. Obviously you can't. Do you want to argue that Gibson's technology was already out there, available, and Gibson was improperly given a patent? Prove it. Show us what matched the patent claims.

emag

@Sinnbox: Or someone suing Mickey D's for not saying that the coffee is hot.

I'm really starting to lose my faith in the human race.

KM91

@darthmole12: My Les Paul and Explorer disagree with you, so does all the work Gibson has done over the last 40 years in advancing guitar technology.

As for this suit, I'm siding with Gibson on this one since the whole thing started with Activision decided to break their marketing agreement with Gibson. I don't know why people think it's OK if Activision does it but it's morally reprehensible if Gibson does it.

zoesch

@glaeven: I'll go ahead and assume you're kidding.

mind in rewind

It would be rather funny if MTV claimed prior art, and cited Milli Vanilli. "simulating an on screen musical performance."

Norsehawk

This is pathetic.

They wait till the series is worth quite a bit of money, and obviously will continue to make money, and so NOW they chose to sue in hope that they can get a % of all profits for a BROAD patent.

Its a foolish thing.

To go against 3 companies, who are probably bigger then you, lawyers is also something I wouldn't recomend.

Next they're gonna sue nintendo, for something, just wait.

Kaemon

Also, doesn't Gibson have a fully electronic and tuneable guitar now, as -@huph: said - maybe it is something from their physical guitar & associated software line that they are claiming as infringing?

Motivated

Watch Konami is next on the list! Gibson just wants some extra pocket change, since anything that does a musical performance on screen is an infringement of their so called patent. Heck, they can sue singstar 80's, and 90's. All the companies on that list, should band together, and counter sue Gibson for billions. How long can a patent last?

zerokoolpsx

I wonder if Guitar Freaks counts as prior art in this case - I think I read elsewhere that the Gibson patent is only five or six years old?

Motivated

@beard.papa: Hahahaha! Classic.

bobtheduck

@huph: sadly, the real info is that they patented the idea of using VR to experience a recorded concert while holding an instrument.

Patents are complete horseshit, unfortunately. You don't need to actually have a real, working idea to get a patent. You get credit for anything if you write it down.

What's even more annoying is that the virtual concert schtick *must* have already been done by the Disney people at epcot, long before gibson decided to fish for dollars, but it probably doesn't matter since it would never occur to a rational person to patent something so straight-forward.

deathbunny

Did Gibson support Guitar Hero knowing they were going to sue them as soon as they got their patent? If so, that's pretty damn low of them.

Mit

so, why is the picture of a fender bass? isnt this about gibson and guitars?

glaeven

If they perceived some sort of patent infringement, it seems odd that they waited so long to file it.

Oyn

Seriously, does *anyone* actually have any info on the reality of this patent case? I mean, obviously to anyone who knows anything about IP issues, Gibson couldn't have patented "simulated musical performances." That's not patentable. That's like patenting "movies." And as funny as it is to joke about, it's just not possible (though patenting the movie *projector* is). They had to patent either a physical product, or a *very* distinct process. Patents don't protect vague ideas or notions, it's a pretty complicated process to acquire one. And it gets expensive to maintain one (and a case like this with big companies and big products probably involves *multiple* patent infringements), they'd be more likely to license the patent to someone else, rather than just sit on it waiting to sue someone. Because they'd still be able to sue against infringement, and collect licensing money from whoever they "lent" the patent to.

So the question is, what is their claim of infringement? My guess is that the GH guitar probably does infringe on some patented mechanical process that Gibson developed, perhaps the manner in which wav files are launched with almost zero latency, which is definitely something many different music companies have different patents on. That's why there's a good bit of difference between different companies' digital software.

Maybe Gibson patented something more explicitly similar to the GH guitar than we're led to believe. They've been working on synth and midi guitars and things like that for more than 15 years, it doesn't seem unreasonable that they would have at one time come up with something strikingly similar to a video game interface.

But, as a sample-based musician, I have *a lot* of bones to pick with current Intellectual Property Laws. So I don't necessarily condone this behavior, but believe me, it is not surprising and both companies are behaving in *exactly* the ways these laws require. This is what "owning" ideas leads to; frivolous legal rhetoric that really only succeeds at keeping innovations away from the public.

huph

I would just like to remind everyone that this has absolutely nothing to do with William Gibson, the genius sci-fi writer. ;-)

This is about a guitar company setting up a catch-all patent that clearly infringes upon standard patent laws to the point that if this isn't instantly thrown out the window by a patent judge, my patent law friend and I will be very surprised.

DaveKap

Next, choreographers will sue DDR for 'simulating an on-screen dancing performance' or microphone companies suing SingStar and Rock Band for 'simulating an on-screen vocal performance'

Del Deadeyes

@RemyDuvalle: you know ..... i'm surprised the electronic drums manufacturer didn't come out yelling for lawsuits .... that itself makes me wonder already ......

it's easy to say the only thing Gibson contributed to the whole project is the shape of les paul, explorer, and SG in a sense .... but other than that .... everything else is from Harmonix ..... they really had no grounds on that ..... i'd say Konami might have some ground ... but heck ... they didn't move

debito

Gibson's got their fingers in everyone's pie. For shame...

Seriously though, how does this case have any merit? I mean, they sat on this patent for so many years and never said anything and they never made a game like guitar hero as far as I know. It doesn't sound right...

CaptLtrl

If Gibson's been licensing crap for the Guitar Hero games all this time, why did it take them so long to file a suit about it? It's like they waited for the revenue to go up so they could ask for more in damages when they finally got around to suing. You don't negotiate with the third iteration of a game to have your guitar featured prominantly as the default controller and have the name plastered on the boxes and in game and then sue the company 6 months later. It seems like they're taking legal advice from Jack Thompson or something.

KirbyMorph

Here's what I found on a quick search of Gibson patents. Do a search of the US Patent office and see if you can find anything else, but I think this is it, filed in July 1998:

"System and method for generating and controlling a simulated musical concert experience
A musician can simulate participation in a concert by playing a musical instrument and wearing a head-mounted 3D display that includes stereo speakers. Audio and video portions of a musical concert are pre-recorded, along with a separate sound track corresponding to the musical instrument played by the musician. Playback of the instrument sound track is controlled by signals generated in the musical instrument and transmitted to a system interface box connected to the audio-video play back device, an audio mixer, and the head-mounted display. An external bypass switch allows the musician to suppress the instrument sound track so that the sounds created by actual playing of the musical instrument are heard along with the pre-recorded audio and video portions."

Nevadan

@debito: Well, the fact that Gibson signed a deal, allowed Activision to have their guitars in the game, yet already had this patent but waited till post-release is what makes this case uber-shady and just wrong.

I don't care if they want to argue that GH simulates a musical performance and they have a patent on that as much as I think it's fucking bullshit that they didn't bother addressing or mentioning this patent until post-release of a game they're actually part of and got paid for.

... especially when 5 games in the US alone already take advantage of the guitar controller.

Not to mention the drum games that simulate a drumming performance... or the Guitar Freaks games that have been around for decades.

RemyDuvalle

EA Will just end up buying gibson, then the lawsuit is void.

beard.papa

wow... true assholes at work

v-rus

"Let's hope Guitar Center has a big Gibson blow out sale this weekend, setting the manufacturer up with some obviously much needed cash."

I dont know if that was a joke or not because just last night I heard on the radio an ad for Guitar Center that was exactly that...a weekend sale that specifically mentioned gibson guitars.

yashichi8bit

@SaintWaldo: i really wonder .... where's Fender in the middle of all of this soap? Sure yes Gibson filed the patent, but to my understanding the patent did not really cover what GH and RB covers as their in-game systems IMO. the fact that Gibson started suing these companies AFTER they have released the game didn't make much sense to me either .... seems to me these people just realized one day that they could sue people in the slightest chance and went and did it ..... with the amount of $$ they are making per guitar ...... i don't see why they don't have the base to jack even more from these companies ...... seriously .....

i can't see myself playing a $8000 up Les Paul .... and i would love an SG but too bad i ain't dreaming .... i will stick with the jasmine I have .... the wood may be different, but the sound is similar in a way .... ~

debito

If this is true, they will have to sue YouTube for all the drunken, air guitar-playing asshats that put up videos of "simulated on-screen musical performances".

Fuck Gibson and their frivolous douchebaggery.

PissedPS3Fan

That's a pretty broad patent. There IS a difference between art theft and derivation of concept. Especially in this case when the definition of a videogame is a simulation of an activity.

On a side note, I'm still waiting to strike with my patent for "simulating an on screen sport".

Jekht

@jayntampa: Okay, but how does "simulating a musical performance" interfere or relate to manufacturing and selling real guitars? Especially when it's not even really "simulating" a musical performance... and you're doing is pressing buttons and flicking a piece of plastic on what happens to be a guitar-shaped controller.

Where was this lawsuit during Amplitude, Frequency... or any rhythm game using a controller? I mean, it's essentially the same thing, just different shaped controllers. All you're doing is successfully/unsuccessfully turning music tracks on with the press of a button.

These games only sell more guitars for Gibson as it inspires more and more kids and teens to play a real guitar.

RemyDuvalle

@SycoKiller: To be honest, it's reached the point with EA where I want them to lose at every turn, whether they're in the right or not. Until they stop riding rough-shot over gamers' desires by aggressively eating other companies, they can fuck right off.

ErskinPig

@jayntampa: Ya, but what do they have that uses that patent? If they acutualy had a use for the patent I would be cool with it, but its the udea that they patented something and then got mad when someone made something that falls within the vagueness of the patnet. I could get a patent for "Item to put your ass into" and sue every pants company out there.

Sinnbox

@SycoKiller: While EA may release utter dreck and buy out and scuttle companies in lieu of actually making fun games, EA does not file a patent, and then 10 years down the line and five games later, THEN sue everyone remotely related for it.

Lyrai

God, doesn't Gibson realize that these games will only help them sell more guitars? Guitar Hero and Rock Band both inspire kids and teens to pick up a real guitar.

And regardless what real guitarists say out of insecurity, GH/RB players don't think the game replaces, is as hard, or should even be compared to a real guitar... they realize it's a game, and many of them want to graduate to the real guitar after they realize how fun just "simulating" it is.

Boycott Gibson!

RemyDuvalle

@bobtheduck: great description

Sinnbox

WTF!? Why is everyone defending EA all of a sudden, you all forget that EA will be the death of the gaming industry as we know it?

SycoKiller

@SaintWaldo: I think that's pretty accurate ... Gibson's hand was forced by Activision bringing suit to invalidate their patent, so Gibson had to also include everyone else with ancillary tech.

If Gibson's claim is legit, you people should be ashamed of of ragging on them - IP rights is the cornerstone of pretty much every creative endeavor. If the claim isn't, they'll lose and be forced to cover legal fees, so they'll be punished.

It just amazes me how quickly people can take sides when they have no real knowledge of the situation other than three obviously biased press releases (one from Activision and two from Gibson).

jayntampa

@bobtheduck: I mean squatting... Haha, Patent Squatting.

bobtheduck

Patent Trolling should be made illegal. Seriously.

bobtheduck

Gotta love frivolous patents. How the hell can you patent something that vague and actually get away with it?

Sunjammer

Actually, Gibson is the one in big trouble. As pointed out in this Wikipedia article: [en.wikipedia.org], the Devecka's patent #5739457, registered in April 14th, 1998, is once held by MTV, but now held by Activision, and is still valid. Furthermore, it actually cover ALL music games, so Gibson can only be sued for using a Gibson based controller for activision.

The only losers will be Gibson, since they charge $2000 for a guitar that can be bought at half price and twice as good (ibanez, PRS, Fender... you name it).

Jestersage

@peAr_nectAr: What soapbox? I'm just saying that I thought GH was cool but i soon tired of it, and am contemplating getting a real guitar, and i know of quite afew people that have done the same thing, I think that Guitar hero is good for guitar sales overall.

Sinnbox

theyre suing because of fake musical experience?

gibson should realize that GH/RB generation will be good opportunity that they'll mostly endup buying a real guitar and learning REAL guitar play.

darktorns

it just amazes the hell out of me that someone can fill a patent for something, and have no intention of creating the very thing they just owned the rights to.

Tenth

How the hell did Gibson get a patent for simulated on-screen guitar performance? Did they ever even make a product that would implement such a thing?

wild_world_girl

The legal profession......giving so much to society everyday.

Cell9song

Personally I think Patents should be banned,because it gets in the way of progress and innovation of all kinds and not just video games or devices for them.

Solarman

@baked ham: Rock Band uses the same tech as Guitar Hero. Both rely on tech created by Harmonix, which is currently owned by Activision but still get paid for the tech that appears in GH.

SaintWaldo

You can get a patent for "simulating an on screen musical performances"? Is this some sort of postmodern, satirical lawsuit or something? What a bunch of BS.

@Sinnbox: Are you serious? Let's get off that soapbox, shall we?

peAr_nectAr

Look, I'm not picking sides, but could it be possible that Gibson reasonably believes it has something worth pursuing? They DID offer a licensing deal for the patent, something that would most surely be cheaper for all. Also, Activision is trying to have the patent invalidated. I think they wouldn't waste time on that if they thought the patent could in no way cover their tech. We are talking about GIBSON, they have plenty of valid, non-disputed patents. They also know the real patent system, not the silly software side that is so popular to gripe about with the kids these days. This isn't Amazon's One-Click. Gibson makes real stuff. So thinking this is patent trolling is a mistake.

Thinking that Gibson just has dollars in its eyes is another. They make plenty of money and it was GH who wanted to use the Les Paul, not the other way around. Gibson guitars were famous when many of your grandmothers were bobby-soxxing in poodle skirts, they aren't doing this for attention or desperation. They will sell guitars and other physical goods long after this is settled. They know that. They just think they are owed some cash on this, and they have every right to a day in court over it.

Either way, it's up to the courts. Gibson may lose. No biggie. Their stockholders would probably sue them if they DIDN'T pursue this. Will the injunction ever come to pass? I doubt it. Even if Gibson wins, they will probably get a settlement in the form of cash on past sales and a percentage of future sales. RB II will still happen, lord help us all.

SaintWaldo

Konami is next. Guitar Freaks is the mother of all these games.I wonder if Guitar Freaks existed before the patent was filed.I am not that interested to research, that what Patent lawyers are for.

jackal888

@darthmole12:

every guitar is unique in their own way is what im trying to say.

(it rhymes!)

mentalboy11

@baked ham: They are suing for the act of a simulated musical performance.

Sinnbox

@mentalboy11: @COLDBLOODED_BMC: It seems I have started a guitar company flame war, different from the standard Sony vs. Microsoft vs. Nintendo wars around these parts.

For the record, that was sarcasm. Although I do absolutely love my ESP guitar, I recognize that Gibson makes good guitars as well. Although IMHO the Les Paul isn't the "gold standard" (though it certainly is up there), but rather the Strat is.

darthmole12

This is as dumb as me creating a patent for interactive tv programs and then suing all game makers.

Sinnbox

But MTV and EA used a Fender body design, not a Gibson. Or are they not suing over design infringement but over the concept of a toy electric guitar? If that's the case, then I really need to see this patent they filed before I can pass judgment on whether it's legit.

baked ham

I said it before, I will say it again.
GIBSON CAN SUCK MY DICK!

daizyujin

@Len Bias Cocaine Surplus: It's not valid till 2009 feburary

patented this post. anyone who posts after this is in violation of my patent.

NessD12

@Lyrai: Gibson needs a kick in the balls for doing that, IMO if you file for a patent you should be working on something that will use the patent. Creating a patent just to sue someone is as dumb as Fat wemon suing theatres for having small chairs!

Sinnbox

@Len Bias Cocaine Surplus: I patent you patent with my own patenting powers of patency?

[KU]Shindokie: Hates The New Layout!

@Dannon: good idea!!

Sinnbox

Only things in life that are certain, Death, Taxes, and Big companies suing each other for every little penny they can.

TheExiledLeader

I patented this post. anyone who posts after this is in violation of my patent.

Len Bias Cocaine Surplus

@Sinnbox: One of the earlier posts on Kotaku illustrated a timeline something like this:
Konami releases Guitar Freaks > Gibson sees, files patnet for effectivly Video Game Guitar Playing > Waits until they can sue for it.

Lyrai

Now it's time for Konami to enter the ring and sue Gibson for trying to steal their already created idea before Gibson decided to try and put a patent on it, c'mon Konami

Dannon

I would think that more people would buy real guitars after realizig that Guitar Hero is fake.

Sinnbox

@darthmole12: The Les Paul is the gold standard of all electric guitars!

COLDBLOODED_BMC

@darthmole12:

you're a joke.
If you can't respect other guitar companies, you can't respect your own guitar, especially gibson.

mentalboy11

@Grue: Gibson's patent may be why Guitar Freaks was never released on home consoles in the US...

Gibsons patent is one of the dumbest things ever, its like someone said that would be cool, lets get a patent so we can sue whoever does it.

Sinnbox

Wow...can you seriously patent anything? I call breathing, you all owe me 10 cents for each inhale.

dmitsuki

...and this is what's wrong with the US Patent system.

Oh well, everyone knows that Gibson's guitars suck. ESP for life!

darthmole12

Is there any chance Gibson is doing this for publicity or do the fees involved heavily outweigh that theory?

jonathan

Never had anything against Gibson until now. I hope they get counter sued into the ground (very likely for trying to sue EA).

NitrousO

woo i totally love a company that can so totally act against the culture it works for (rock culture).

caster

Who pissed in Gibson's cornflakes?

Wolfers

What's next? Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo?

slomo788

Ha ha! </Nelson>

If I could've sued the creators of GH/RB for creating a musical travesty masquerading as a casual title (or vice versa), I would have done so a long time ago. This is almost as good.

emag

Has Gibson filed suit against Konami for their GuitarFreaks games? They "simulate a musical performance" as well. Oh wait, they released their game the year before Gibson filed their patent. Does this make Konami Time-Thiefs? What has the world come to?!

Grue

So is Gibson so mad that real guitar sales are down they're suing anything remotely related to it? Watch out, Kotaku! You're encouraging people to buy Rock Band & GH! Gibson will probably sue you next. Along with Gamestop, Gizmodo, Target, and the maker of jelly beans.

Lyrai

Well, they're screwed now.
They were pushing it going up against Activision's legal team. Now they're adding in EA and MTV Lawyers?
This is going to end with them owing EA and Activision money somehow.

Polywhirl

They're getting a bit ridiculous now.

Konstrix

Wow, that's a ten-fold increase in douchebaggery right there.

Nealjs

Wait, what? Why is EA dragged into this?

DrAndonuts2k

@darthmole12: You seem like a metalcore type guy.

uranutan