Icontrolpad Updates!

[Sphinxter]

 

[Nintendo]

 

[craigix]

 

[fusion_power]

So your gonna lawsuit Apple, craig? Good luck!

No, I highly suspect they will lawsuit me trying to stop us selling it. I want the world to know their claims are bullshit.

You were first, they were not, so I think it is not a problem. Like always, the first one wins. They can't sue you, but YOU can sue them and get a nice bunch of money for better sleeping tonight.
Maybe you have to rename your iControlPad so it doesn't sound anyway Aplle-releated but if you made this kind of device first and especialy patanted it first, you should be onto the save side.
Otherwise, everyone could copy an already patented Device later with an own patent. I doubt this is a way how it works out there. :lol: Where are we? XD

 

[craigix]

This vid:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7Y3JhEcBzQ&feature=related

At 1:28 has a crazy enclosure for the ZX Spectrum, one of several.

 

[Trip]

I remember playing on an arcade machine when I was little. The guy came over to mess about with it for some reason and I looked in the back and saw a Vic20 sitting on a shelf. The arcade joystick was wired into the normal joystick port and the coin shoot simply dropped the coin onto a certain key to start the game.

I wonder if Apple ever tried to patent something like that? :rolleyes:

 

[fischju2000]

Engadget wrote an article about the patent, http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/03/apple-patent-application-shocker-games-need-buttons/ but they've been jacking Apple off the past couple of days with all the iPad news. No mention of the iControlpad.

 

[Exophase]

Engadget wrote an article about the patent, http://www.engadget....s-need-buttons/ but they've been jacking Apple off the past couple of days with all the iPad news. No mention of the iControlpad.

Actually they did like to a previous Engadget article on iControlPad (and several other articles for other attachment devices), and they didn't seem to put this patent in much of a positive light.

 

[Fishbong]

Hey craig, if it isn't too expensive you should totally patent the keyboard - gaming controls combination of the Pandora. Just to be on the safe side. Isn't Sony planning a new MID/PSP crossover device? Could be trouble...

 

[Dauric]

The problem here isn't necessarily the patent of the iControlpad, this is just a shot across the proverbial bow. I ran across a few tidbits of information while responding to a post for an indie-gaming dev group I work with.

The iControlpad requires a jailbroken iPhone. Jailbreaking is, in the official legal briefs of Apple, prosecutable under the DMCA as a copyright violation. The request for exception filed with the U.S. Copyright office by the Electronic Freedom Foundation is expected to be ruled on later this year. Apple is fighting any granted exception. If the exception doesn't go through the iControlpad, because it requires jailbroken iPhones, requires the law to be broken to be used. IANAL, though I'm sure there's technical legalese that would encapsulate the idea.

Throwing out this patent thing is a pre-emptive strike, since the exception is still under consideration it's questionable whether or not Apple can make any headway with the DMCA prosecution angle, they're doing this first.

--

My first thought: Don't let this derail Pandora. Don't fight this to the point that they bleed you dry and other projects, like the Pandora, suffers. Between this snap-on gizmo for a closed-source device by a prickishly draconian company, or the complete pocket-computer that is built for and by the community, the latter is a far more impressive project (and the one I pre-ordered...)

Second thought: redesign it for the Droid. Apple wants to treat you like crap, take it somewhere else. I don't know how feasible this is, or what the audience for the Droid Vs. the iPhone are as far as people who want gaming controllers, but if Apple's going to fight you, why support them?

 

[quadomatic]

The problem here isn't necessarily the patent of the iControlpad, this is just a shot across the proverbial bow. I ran across a few tidbits of information while responding to a post for an indie-gaming dev group I work with.

The iControlpad requires a jailbroken iPhone. Jailbreaking is, in the official legal briefs of Apple, prosecutable under the DMCA as a copyright violation. The request for exception filed with the U.S. Copyright office by the Electronic Freedom Foundation is expected to be ruled on later this year. Apple is fighting any granted exception. If the exception doesn't go through the iControlpad, because it requires jailbroken iPhones, requires the law to be broken to be used. IANAL, though I'm sure there's technical legalese that would encapsulate the idea.

Throwing out this patent thing is a pre-emptive strike, since the exception is still under consideration it's questionable whether or not Apple can make any headway with the DMCA prosecution angle, they're doing this first.

--

My first thought: Don't let this derail Pandora. Don't fight this to the point that they bleed you dry and other projects, like the Pandora, suffers. Between this snap-on gizmo for a closed-source device by a prickishly draconian company, or the complete pocket-computer that is built for and by the community, the latter is a far more impressive project (and the one I pre-ordered...)

Second thought: redesign it for the Droid. Apple wants to treat you like crap, take it somewhere else. I don't know how feasible this is, or what the audience for the Droid Vs. the iPhone are as far as people who want gaming controllers, but if Apple's going to fight you, why support them?

Regardless of whether iControlPad requires a jailbroken iPhone, it doesn't change the fact that the design for the controller itself was made well before Apple filed their patent. DMCA shouldn't get in the way of that...or anything in the entire world for that matter.

 

[trooper]

And as Craig has already said, It (the icontrolpad) has been designed to work with other devices/phones,
Not just the iphone/itouch.

Trooper

 

[Fishbong]

I don't think that "selling a device that requires someone to break a law to use it" is a crime anywhere.

Even if it was, just make the iControlpad so that it can also be used as a gamepad on PCs - problem solved.

EDIT: Oops, that's what i get for leaving the reply box open for 2 hours before actually replying.

 

[Dauric]

No, the jailbreaking issue doesn't change the patent situation, which in the U.S. patent law "is he who patents first wins" with a few limited exceptions, and in recent years the U.S. patent office has been granting patents for things that otherwise should be included in those exceptions (AOL's patenting history as one particularly shining example). Moreover they've been granting them predominantly to large companies, and not to individuals and startups, in no small part because the patenting process has become rather arcane and labyrinthine, and the big companies are the ones that have the money to spend on a small army of patent and IP lawyers*.

*and the army of lobbyists suggesting modifications to the patent process that favor large companies

What the jailbreaking issue is however is a potential minefield of -other- legal issues down the road that Craig should probably discuss with his IP lawyer while he's on the phone. About the time that the US adopted the DMCA, other countries adopted similar rules some more draconian than others. Anywhere that Craig ships to can be somewhere that Apple can chose to challenge the legality of his device, by suing under that country's copyright laws.

Apple isn't doing this because they believe in the sanctity of patent laws, they're doing it to maintain absolute and total control over their devices, a philosophy that Apple has adhered to since their earliest machines. Even if Craig manages to win this patent fight Apple may find some way to come back at the iControlpad through other means.

 

[Dauric]

I don't think that "selling a device that requires someone to break a law to use it" is a crime anywhere.

Even if it was, just make the iControlpad so that it can also be used as a gamepad on PCs - problem solved.

EDIT: Oops, that's what i get for leaving the reply box open for 2 hours before actually replying.

Lockpicks require a license to own, if you're not a registered locksmith you can be arrested just for having them because they have no legal use to anyone that doesn't work on locks for a living, so yes there are cases where that is the situation. And before the "But that's physical home security, not software on a privately owned piece of hardware." arguments come in, two things:

1) I agree it's a bullshit argument and you should be able to do whatever you want with hardware you own.

2) However the DRM-anti-piracy camp frequently equates copyright violation to physical theft, and they're arguing that locking down their systems is a "lock" on their intellectual property. It's this philosophy that Apple will hold if the DMCA exception isn't granted and they get the opportunity to go after jailbreaking software, and anyone "supporting" jailbreaking.

I agree that a change of hardware compatibility would fix that issue (though again, I Am Not A Lawyer), but if you look at the iControlpad site it is -entirely- focused on compatibility with the iPhone, whether it's the blurb right at the top of the page about "Is your iPhone jailbroken?", to the survey of devices, to -every- image on the site, all of the content there is suggestive that it's an iPhone-only peripheral.

 

[Fishbong]

A lockpick is illegal to own because it can be used for illegal purposes.
The iControlpad cannot be used to jailbreak an iPhone. If you wanted to use it with an iPhone, you need to jailbreak it.
But apparently it can be used with an array of devices.
I too think it would be smart renaming it, also add the possibility to insert other phones with an adjustable clamp - like device.

 

[craigix]

Whatever you run on the iPhone is what makes the ICP work with the iPhone, the ICP does not 'hack the iphone' in any way.

It's just a controller, it would equally work on the PC if you wrote software for it, or, as has been said, the google phone.

 

[Fishbong]

Maybe Apple could sue craig for "enticing people to jailbreak iphones"
Also, what's all this talk about the DMCA?
Do you think your American law is valid worldwide?

 

[GizmoTheGreen]

no, i was sleep mumbling

 

[Dauric]

Maybe Apple could sue craig for "enticing people to jailbreak iphones"
Also, what's all this talk about the DMCA?
Do you think your American law is valid worldwide?

DMCA is just the American version yes, but Canada and Australia have more restrictive versions in place that were adopted at about the same time, England has one similar but i'm not sure where it stands relative to the DMCA. Apple, being a U.S. company is involved in a dispute with the Elecrronic Freedom Foundation about an exception to jailbreaking in the DMCA's modification to U.S. copyright law. If the exception is granted later this year then Apple won't be able to complain about jailbreaking. If the exception isn't granted then it's a green-light for them to sue people who develop jailbreaking software.

If they get to sue in the U.S. their position suing overseas is strengthened, as most modern international copyright treaties are reciprocal.

Craig, I understand that the controller is able to interface with a variety of devices, but look at your web-page, it's focused almost entirely on the iPhone, and Apple is notorious about being hostile towards third party developers, especially ones that don't pay apple their licensing fees. Test it with other devices, publish about interfacing it with Droid and other devices, Cover Your Ass!

Remember Bleem. Bleem won the case for a commercial emulator in the courts, but Sony effectively won even though they were wrong by bankrupting Bleem through legal fees. Apple could be completely filled with horse-shit if the press the jailbreaking/copyright issue, but they don't need to be correct, just correct enough to get a judge to hear the case to force you to be in court and blow money on lawyers. Insert appeals processes, obscure variations, different filings based on different aspects of the device and they can tie you up for decades. This is (sadly) a common practice.

Personally I agree that Apple's full of biological waste, but they're not concerned with being "right" in a legal sense, they're concerned with maintaining control over their products and you're someone outside their control.