In the ongoing saga between Ironburg Inventions and Valve, a new ruling appeared on August 17 that gives Valve another chance to invalidate some parts of the patents involved.
The case against Valve boils down to the back paddles included on the Steam Controller, which Ironburg have repeatedly claimed infringes on their patents. Initially, the courts backed Ironburg and awarded at least $4 million in damages, which was upheld in later ruling against Valve.
Now though another ruling has appeared after an appeal which actually backs Valve. The interesting part here is that one piece of the evidence from Valve during the trial was on some prior art that should have invalidated parts of the patents from Ironburg.
It involves an article on xboxer360.com (which no longer exists) that you can see using the Wayback Machine showing a controller with buttons on the back being reviewed in 2010 (keep in mind the patent Ironburg were granted is from 2013). Valve showed copies as evidence, but this was ignored in previous rulings. The things is, this same article was even used by Ironburg in their patent application shown at the bottom under "Other references".
While you might not be able to normally view the article now, it still existed. For it to be taken into account as prior art it had to be "sufficiently accessible to the public interested in the art" and of course it was. The ruling even notes that references to it were found by a patent examiner by doing a "brief" search on it.
The finding then is that this makes there be "overwhelming evidence" of prior art, which is something that was basically ignored in previous rulings because dates didn't line up so it had "not been authenticated". We're now waiting for the next part, as it has been remanded so it's getting a reconsideration.
Don't get me wrong, some patents do serve a purpose and are very expensive in R&D and have every right to be there and to get a share for others implementing it (things like 5G technology).
But I really have an issue with all those trivial patents which should not exist in the first place.
A button is just a button, leave it at that. A corner of a device just that, how ever round.
I'd argue that patents generally hinder evolution, but in some cases I see the need of the one doing expensive R&D to be compensated for their effort.
Was it patent trolls that took the steam controller off the market, and not poor sales?Likely a mixture of both. Very unfortunate. It is an excellent controller. Far ahead of its time.
Was it patent trolls that took the steam controller off the market, and not poor sales?
Sales would be my guess, combined with mixed reviews and poor support.
Was it patent trolls that took the steam controller off the market, and not poor sales?
Sales would be my guess, combined with mixed reviews and poor support.
Honestly, if they went all-in on support and put out an official application like SC Controller then I think it would have done far better. As it is, you've got to rely on a third party dev for that, who turned out to be flaky and basically abandoned it.
I have a third party PS3 controller with buttons on the back. Got that way before 2013.
What is the brand? It could actually help if you find mention of it from before 2013 or 2011, like the website you might have ordered from. I also quoted that one from scuf gaming, but missed that earlier review.
Support in what sense? The beauty of the Steam Controller is that it did not need support from any company but Valve.Was it patent trolls that took the steam controller off the market, and not poor sales?
Sales would be my guess, combined with mixed reviews and poor support.
Support in what sense? The beauty of the Steam Controller is that it did not need support from any company but Valve.Was it patent trolls that took the steam controller off the market, and not poor sales?
Sales would be my guess, combined with mixed reviews and poor support.
Also they supported the device quite well post launch with software updates. I have even seen some anecdotal mentions that Valve was very good about replacing defective parts.
I just wish that this lawsuit is what's holding back Valve from releasing a Steam Controller V2.It's not. They circumvented patent on Steam Deck. I wish for Steam Controller v2 as well.
I just wish that this lawsuit is what's holding back Valve from releasing a Steam Controller V2.
Oh, the new controller has a screen and cpu / gpu combo and an ssd, and you can even play games on it. :D :D :D
It's not.What makes you think so? Imo, the Steam Deck is no proof that the patent is not blocking a Steam Controller V2. The Steam Deck is a portable console, not a controller (the patent specifies "standard controller with back buttons").
I wish for Steam Controller v2 as well.Exactly my stance. Imo, the best controller I ever used and I still have a computer that I game on.
Last edited by Mohandevir on 30 August 2021 at 1:30 pm UTC
Imo, the best controller I ever used and I still have a computer that I game on.I concur completely. Two touch pads that won't drift in a day and age where all three console manufacturers have been sued over stick drift are invaluable. From Nintendo's Joy-Cons to Sony's DualSense to Microsoft's Elite Series 2, all have been involved in stick drift lawsuits. In Sony's case, they raised the price by 20$ and it drifts. In Microsoft's case, they sold it for close to 200$ and it drifts. How can one justify this?
Apart from the two excellent touch pads, the Steam Controller boasted dual stage triggers, back buttons that were not tied to another input on the controller, and a battery life of at least 80 hours although I have gotten over 100 hours. No other controller on the market compares in terms of battery life. The price was incredible too, considering how other controllers cost far more despite not having all these features.
See more from me