VR rift OPENS UP: Total Recall Technologies hurls lawsuit at Facebook's Oculus

Systems capable of AR are going to wipe the floor with VR only devices. These guys are fighting over the deckchairs on the Titanic...

Usually the plaintiffs will put forward their strongest argument summarising the case to curry sympathy from the point if first reading. The fact the summary they have given doesn't present anything like a knock-down case is in and of itself revealing. The legal text quoted for example doesn't say Luckey was inhibited from competing with his own work. Just because you do some work for someone, they don't own you or your knowledge of the space you are working in. Non disclosure is not equal to non-compete (nor is an exclusivity agreement). They may have been disclosing information to him he was already aware of from his own work in the area. Additionally it's interesting they are suing for breach of contract and not for patent infringement. So it would seem Luckey hasn't stolen their invention at all. He's just decided to do a headset in the same field as he was already working (and for which he was employed - because he was already knowledgable of the field). I could imagine the people who employed him left spluttering - "no our young minion is daring to act as a non-minion, and doing rather well, get back to your station minion"

Over time as the minion has done very well indeed and in terms of business expansion and sale to Facebook that annoyance probably turned into a gleam in the eye accompanied by hands being rubbed together.

Of course I'm saying all this without sight of all the evidence, so could be way off base.

odd

That they didn't sue before given how publicly Occulus have been conducting their business.

Oh hang on, now they're WORTH suing. Now there's a troll law they could make... 10% reduction in award per year you've known about the defendant's actions while not pursuing them.

Virtuality

sounds like Existenz (sp.?) in one of Cronenburger's many patchier efforts. I'd never heard of that company. If you invested, maybe you still have a share of the trade name, could be lucrative.

It's been an idea supposedly on the cusp of reality and a prop in fiction for such a looong time now.

Nintendo's Virtual Boy was pretty good, but not enough games. Always tempted to buy one, but have only played Wario, which is good fun. The system is said to be headache-inducing in sessions of any length.

There were also the more sophisticated arcade games in the US, also a looong time ago. More recently, the sealed-capsule Gundam games here. Gundam games are still popular, but I haven't seen the capsule set-up for a few years.

Wild Palms, how long ago was that?

Over-used as a prop in written SF, too.

Sony was marketing, not quite VR, but immersive binocular video displays, about 15 years ago. Suppose they sold some, but they were off the market pretty quickly.

Perhaps people just aren't that interested in the whole idea?

The Oculus Rift non-product is getting massive hype on tech sites, especially since or because of the faecesbook acquisition, why not expect their effort, too, to sink with barely a trace?

I seem to recall Oculus Rift from a not-much-good science fiction book, but suppose it must have been one of the other rifts.

Re: At last! The business use case for VR

Can't think what to say...

*plugh* or *xyzzy*

Re: At last! The business use case for VR

Mongo,

You need to write a text adventure on this theme. Even just what you have posted here, with a few illustrations and sound effects, would be a huge hit among Apple devotees.

Re: Not this again

I agree 100%, unfortunately our government, the USA, is ran by mostly lawyers. We all know lawyers are some of the lowest people when it comes to ethics. I wish our judicial system would make the losing party pay for all expenses incurred by the winning party. We would definitely cut down on frivolous lawsuits and free up our courts to take on cases that actually have merit. Also, our legislative branch is ran by old timers who admit to not even touching a computer or even sending 1 email in their lifetime. How can someone legislate something when they are clueless on the subject matter?

There's no legal requirement to sue as soon as possible

There are two reasons to sue if someone stole your idea (I have no idea of the facts, let's just assume for the moment that is what happened)

One, you want to stop them from selling theirs so your implementation can win in the marketplace.

Two, you want to be financially compensated from your role in making possible their financially successful product.

Strategy One only matters if you think you can successfully bring this idea to market yourself. That's not always the case. Even inventors of some pretty major ideas have been unable to do that. Think about who invented the GUI, and who made it financially successful - Xerox was no lone inventor nor short of resources, but it took Apple to popularize it and Microsoft to make it ubiquitous.

You seem to be arguing that they should sue the moment they know someone has stolen their idea, but the law doesn't say they have to do that. Nor does the law in Europe. You have to defend trademarks in that manner, but not patents. If you are pursuing Strategy Two you want them to be successful in the market so you have something to recover, so you wait until that's the case.

They waited until there was a launch date for the Oculus announced, so they can get their cut for their part in its invention. They could have waited until 2020 hoping it would become the next iPhone so they could really cash in, but by waiting until after its release they run the risk it will flop and they get nothing. By suing now they hope for a lump sum payment based on its hype value plus a royalty. If its a mega hit they'll get less that way but the lump sum would mean they get something no matter what.

It will be up to the courts to decide whether they had any part in its invention, and if so what they deserve in compensation.

Re: "...Rift VR headset is expected to ship in the first quarter of 2016."

You couldn't be any more incorrect. The gaming community alone is crying for this to get onto the market as quickly as possible.

I myself have been waiting since the 90s for this to become a thing I can buy. VR is going to be huge.

Otherwise Valve/HTC wouldn't be developing their own system and neither would Sony.

Re: "...Rift VR headset is expected to ship in the first quarter of 2016."

Why can't people just understand that the vast majority of people don't need to purchase something for it to be a massive success. The Playstation 2 is widely considered to be the most successful console of all time yet was still owned by less than 2.5% of the world's population.

I'm certainly not suggesting that Oculus will sell that many in fact I doubt all manufacturers VR headsets put together will reach that many for at least a decade. But to suggest there is no demand for the product is just wrong. Many gamers myself included have been salivating at the thought of getting their hands on a Rift since it was first announced and even after the Facebook purchase I would expect this to be a big success.