<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">
<channel>
<title>Techdirt. Stories filed under &quot;wii&quot;</title>
<description>Easily digestible tech news...</description>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/</link>
<language>en-us</language>

<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 12 Dec 2012 08:04:38 PST</pubDate>
<title>Nintendo Still Loves DRM; The Internet Not So Much</title>
<dc:creator>Tim Cushing</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121210/15222521341/nintendo-still-loves-drm-internet-not-so-much.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121210/15222521341/nintendo-still-loves-drm-internet-not-so-much.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Of all the walled gardens out there, Nintendo&#39;s is one of the most bizarre. On the strength of its software legacy and its skill in capturing the handheld market, Nintendo has been able to erect a bizarre closed system that relies heavily on DRM and an almost self-contained "internet." It vigorously defends itself against infringement and views its target audience as innocents incapable of dealing with an open connection to the rest of the swearing, violent, bullying world.<br />
<br />
Long after the other consoles had moved on to CDs and DVDs, Nintendo held onto its proprietary formats in order to protect itself from piracy. Now that the others consoles on the market have shifted emphasis towards online services, Nintendo has reluctantly joined the pack. Of course, this being Nintendo, the online experience is hampered by its continued belief that its average customer is about eight years old. And the gaming experience itself is crippled by pervasive DRM.<br />
<br />
At Ars Technica, Kyle Orland points out that Nintendo&#39;s online service is <i>almost</i>&nbsp;great, <a href="http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2012/12/wii-us-restrictive-drm-is-a-baffling-throwback/" target="_blank">if it wasn&#39;t for all the roadblocks set up in a futile attempt to stop infringement</a>. While Nintendo has made some vague promises about moving to a cloud-based save feature and allows each WiiU to have up to 12 separate accounts, the underlying DRM keeps the experience from ever being much more than a frustrating mess for paying customers.
<blockquote>
<i>As Nintendo&#39;s <a href="http://www.nintendo.com/consumer/systems/wiiu/en_na/account_your_account.jsp" target="_blank">Wii U FAQ</a> makes clear, "a Nintendo Network Account can only be used on the console where it was created." Thus, any games tied to that unique online ID will only work on the first system they&#39;re purchased and downloaded to. This is in essence the same setup that Nintendo used to protect downloaded Virtual Console and WiiWare games on the first Wii, a setup that not only <a href="http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2009/02/having-conquered-sales-nintendo-tackles-piracy/" target="_blank">utterly failed to stop piracy on the system</a> but also <a href="http://www.avsforum.com/t/776378/wii-repair-experience-virtual-console-games-lost" target="_blank">caused headaches for many early Wii owners with faulty systems</a>.</i><br />
<br />
<i>Tying downloaded games to a single system means there&#39;s no way for a user to access those games at a friend&#39;s house short of lugging the entire system along (yes, the Wii is a lot smaller and lighter than other contemporary systems, but still...). It also means a game downloaded to the Wii U in the living room won&#39;t be playable on a second system in the kids&#39; room, even if the same password-protected Nintendo Network ID was used on both systems.</i><br />
<br />
<i>It also means that if your system breaks down, you can&#39;t just go buy a new one (or borrow one from a friend) and immediately recover your content using your account. Instead, you have to go through Nintendo&#39;s official repair process, waiting up to two weeks for the system to be returned just to maintain the system-locked license data&mdash;a caveat I <a href="http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2012/11/how-nintendo-drm-trapped-400-of-downloaded-games-on-my-failing-wii/" target="_blank">learned about first hand recently</a>. And in the extreme case your Wii U is stolen, it seems there&#39;s no way to recover your purchased games (Nintendo has refused numerous requests for comment on its DRM scheme). Sure, you can back up purchases to a USB hard drive, but thanks to this licensing scheme, those backups are no more portable than the actual bits stored on the Wii U&#39;s internal storage.</i></blockquote>
<a href="http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2012/11/how-nintendo-drm-trapped-400-of-downloaded-games-on-my-failing-wii/" target="_blank">Orland&#39;s first hand experience wasn&#39;t pleasant</a>. He had over $400 of downloaded games he was hoping to move to his WiiU. During the multistep process -- which requires both systems be on <i>and</i> online -- his Wii crashed. Big bold letters everywhere during the process warned against turning off either system during transfer. The data being moved isn&#39;t the important part. What&#39;s absolutely essential during this move is that the <i>licenses</i> transfer intact. Orland couldn&#39;t simply re-download his games since the licenses were tied to his original Wii. Nintendo&#39;s tech support informed him that there was no other way to transfer license and account data to the WiiU short of sending the Wii off for repairs at his expense and hoping it returned in working order with all data (especially those licenses) intact. The final cost? $85 for the repair and a couple of weeks with $400 worth of games in limbo.<br />
<br />
Even when everything goes exactly <i>right</i>, the license transfer process is still a pain. <a href="http://www.wired.com/gamelife/2012/11/10-things/all/" target="_blank">Chris Kohler at Game|Life runs it down thusly</a>:
<blockquote>
<i>If you have tons of content &mdash; game save data, Mii characters, and downloaded software &mdash; on your old Wii, you&rsquo;ll want to transfer them over to Wii U. The process is about as convoluted as can possibly be. You&rsquo;ll actually need to alternate between your Wii and your Wii U, which means either hooking them both up to the TV or swapping cables. First you have to get an SD card. Then you have to put it in your Wii U to &ldquo;prepare&rdquo; it for transfer. (You&rsquo;ll need an internet connection to do this so Nintendo can transfer the digital rights to the software.)</i></blockquote>
Fun stuff, that. Plus, it requires an internet connection just to move your <i>own</i> files from one purchased system to another. Kohler points out that it takes about a half hour to pull them off the Wii and <i>another</i>&nbsp;half hour to load them onto the WiiU. But it&#39;s not just the time it takes. It&#39;s the ridiculous hoops the user is forced to jump through just to satisfy Nintendo&#39;s demands for a clean, closed, DRM-laden system.
<blockquote>
<i>[B]esides being time-consuming, there&rsquo;s also a big missing feature. If you had games already stored on an SD card and not on the Wii&rsquo;s system memory, you have to move them back to the Wii or else you can&rsquo;t transfer them. But if you have games stored on the SD card in the first place, that&rsquo;s probably because you ran out of memory on your Wii (not hard, since it only has 512 megabytes in there). So you are screwed. The transfer process will move over all of the digital licenses, but to get those games onto your Wii U, you&rsquo;ll have to individually download every single one again from the digital store, which will take forever.</i></blockquote>
This is what you&#39;re in for when you deal with a company clearly more interested in pirates than customers. As pointed out earlier by Orland, all the ridiculous DRM crammed into every spare corner of the Wii did very little to stop piracy. Apparently, Nintendo&#39;s decided that the original Wii just didn&#39;t have <i>enough DRM</i>&nbsp;and has taken it to the extreme with its latest console. The worst aspect of its convoluted "license transfer" system is that the <i>more</i> you&#39;ve purchased, the <i>longer</i> it takes. Nintendo&#39;s concern that someone, somewhere might make off with a free game has turned it into a company that punishes its biggest customers the hardest.<br />
<br />
Then there&#39;s Nintendo&#39;s half-hearted "embrace" of the connected experience, which it approaches with the enthusiasm of someone guilted into hugging a highly contagious acquaintance. True, some of this standoffishness isn&#39;t <i>solely</i> Nintendo&#39;s fault. It has worked to capture a younger audience than the other consoles and as such, it is stuck following the privacy restrictions handed down by various governments in order to protect children from a variety of online menaces and nuisances. Staying in compliance with these regulations, along with its half-hearted (and deeply suspicious) approach to all things "internet", means the actual "connected" experience approaches surreality. Back to Chris Kohler:
<blockquote>
<i>I signed up for Nintendo Network, Nintendo&rsquo;s first (!) ever attempt to create an account-based online service for its players. I clicked through the Terms of Service, skimming them. As you do. OK, I&rsquo;m not going to post anything offensive, no problem. I enter my details into my profile and throw Game|Life&rsquo;s URL and my Twitter handle in there so people know it&rsquo;s me. Big mistake. Minutes after I posted my profile, I got a message saying that I had posted prohibited content and that Nintendo had blocked my profile pending a change. The hell? <b>Turns out that you are strictly prohibited from posting anything on Miiverse that might allow someone to personally identify you</b>. It didn&rsquo;t specifically call out Twitter URLs, but I guess those must also be banned. Nintendo clearly doesn&rsquo;t want any stories in the press about harassment (or worse) stemming from people meeting on Miiverse. <b>So it is doing everything it can to make sure its members do not know who each other actually is</b>.</i></blockquote>
In essence, the Miiverse is a great place to meet complete strangers but a terrible place to hang out with friends. How on earth an entire Miiverse full of strangers is supposed to prevent harassment or any other internet-related abuse is beyond me. It would seem that kids would be <i>safer</i> hanging out with people they know, rather than a bunch of avatars who could be anybody.<br />
<br />
It gets even stranger. Over in Europe, where the privacy protections for minors are even more severe (and confusing), <a href="http://www.theverge.com/2012/12/7/3740760/nintendo-wii-u-eshop-blocking-mature-content" target="_blank">full-grown adults are finding themselves treated like kids playing hooky</a>.
<blockquote>
<i>European Wii U owners are reporting being unable to buy or watch trailers for mature-rated games in Nintendo&#39;s Wii U eShop. Eurogamer reports that they are unable to access the pages for ZombiU or Assassin&#39;s Creed 3 during daytime hours, even with no parental controls set. Instead, they&#39;re greeted with the message "You cannot view this content. The times during which this content can be viewed have been restricted."</i></blockquote>
Customer service offered this response:
<blockquote>
D<i>ear customer, we would like to let you know that Nintendo has always aimed to offer gameplay experiences suited to all age groups, observing carefully all the relevant regulations regarding content access that are present in the various European countries. <b>We have thus decided to restrict the access to content which is unsuitable to minors (PEGI) to the 11 P.M. - 3 A.M. time window</b>.</i></blockquote>
Well, Nintendo&#39;s outlook is definitely brimming with optimism. Either it feels a very small minority of WiiU owners are above the age of 18, or it thinks 4 hours a day is plenty for selling mature content. Nintendo&#39;s not going anywhere anytime soon, but the focus of its business seems to have shifted to attempting to prevent&nbsp;<i>bad things</i> with much less emphasis being placed on providing&nbsp;<i>good things</i>. Fear may be a powerful motivator, but it rarely produces good work.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121210/15222521341/nintendo-still-loves-drm-internet-not-so-much.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121210/15222521341/nintendo-still-loves-drm-internet-not-so-much.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121210/15222521341/nintendo-still-loves-drm-internet-not-so-much.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>like-an-anti-theft-device-combined-with-a-helicopter-parent</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20121210/15222521341</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 4 Nov 2011 13:40:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Nintendo Stomps Motiva's Patent Infringement Claims</title>
<dc:creator>Zachary Knight</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111103/07412616620/nintendo-stomps-motivas-patent-infringement-claims.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111103/07412616620/nintendo-stomps-motivas-patent-infringement-claims.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Businessweek is reporting that <a href="http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-11-02/nintendo-wins-ruling-in-itc-patent-case-over-video-game-systems.html" target="_blank">Nintendo has won a patent infringement case brought by Motiva</a>. Back in November 2008, Motiva filed a patent infringement suit, via <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080702/1117121576.shtml">the ITC loophole</a> against Nintendo over its <a href="http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&#038;Sect2=HITOFF&#038;p=1&#038;u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&#038;r=1&#038;f=G&#038;l=50&#038;co1=AND&#038;d=PTXT&#038;s1=7,292,151.PN.&#038;OS=PN/7,292,151&#038;RS=PN/7,292,151" target="_blank">7,292,151</a> patent for "Human Movement Measurement System" filed in June 2005 and granted in November 2007.  Just this week the ITC ruled that Nintendo's Wii and Wii remote did not infringe on Motiva's patent and will not be blocked from import into the US. The judge on the case found that Motiva had not established a market behind its invention which is necessary to win an ITC case. The case still needs to be reviewed by the full six-member commission of the ITC, but Nintendo remains confident that they will also rule in Nintendo's favor -- which seems likely, since the commission frequently follows such rulings by ITC judges
<br /><br /> This case has a couple of similarities to the <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110908/09364115848/nintendo-wii-accused-willfully-infringing-patent-that-was-applied-after-wii-was-introduced.shtml">two recent</a> <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110929/09472516135/no-rest-productive-successful-nintendo-sued-again-over-wii-remote.shtml">patent suits</a> brought against Nintendo. Much like those patent suits, Motiva's involved a patent that was filed for the same year Nintendo introduced the Wii and the Wii Remote to the world. As with the UltimatePointer suit, Motiva does not have a product on the market, as can be seen by the lack of any product details on <a href="http://motiva-llc.com/home.html" target="_blank">Motiva's website</a> -- which, again, was fatal for the case, since the ITC cases (unlike federal court cases) do require some actual products.  It's good to see the ITC recognize this case made little sense, and hopefully it bodes well for Nintendo's other cases brought by patent holders.  However, just the fact that it keeps getting hit with questionable patent suits again should raise questions about the state of the patent system today.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111103/07412616620/nintendo-stomps-motivas-patent-infringement-claims.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111103/07412616620/nintendo-stomps-motivas-patent-infringement-claims.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111103/07412616620/nintendo-stomps-motivas-patent-infringement-claims.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>one-down-many-more-to-go</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20111103/07412616620</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 4 Oct 2011 05:03:33 PDT</pubDate>
<title>No Rest For The Productive And Successful; Nintendo Sued Again Over The Wii Remote</title>
<dc:creator>Zachary Knight</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110929/09472516135/no-rest-productive-successful-nintendo-sued-again-over-wii-remote.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110929/09472516135/no-rest-productive-successful-nintendo-sued-again-over-wii-remote.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Just how many patents can cover a single piece of technology? I think we are looking to break a record with the Wii Remote. <br /><br />Today's entry come to us via Gamasutra, which was alerted to <a href="http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/37477/Nintendo_Sued_By_UltimatePointer_Over_Wii_Remote_Design.php" target="_blank">the news that UltimatePointer is suing Nintendo</a> and various retail outlets -- including Best Buy, Wal-Mart, Target, Kmart, Gamestop and more -- for violating their patent, number <a href="http://www.google.com/patents?id=4euTAAAAEBAJ&#038;printsec=abstract&#038;zoom=4&#038;source=gbs_overview_r&#038;cad=0#v=onepage&#038;q&#038;f=false" target="_blank">7,746,321</a>, for an "Easily Deployable Interactive Direct-Pointing System and Presentation Control System and Calibration Method Therefor" (what a mouthful). Much like <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110908/09364115848/nintendo-wii-accused-willfully-infringing-patent-that-was-applied-after-wii-was-introduced.shtml" target="_blank">ThinkOptic's patents</a>, this one was filed in the same year Nintendo revealed the Wii to the world. Not only that, it was filed the very same month. Not implying anything, just pointing out some facts.
<br /><br />
According to the <a href="http://pdfserver.amlaw.com/tx/NintendoPatentSept15.pdf" target="_blank">court filing</a> (pdf and embedded below), which was done in East Texas, of course, Nintendo is guilty of manufacturing a technology that was designed and finalized prior to the filing of UltimatePointer's patent. Which of course would mean that Nintendo and all those retailers are willfully infringing on this patent. So now, according to UltimatePointer, Nintendo owes them treble damages and licensing fees.
<br /><br />
There is a major difference between this patent and the patents filed by ThinkOptic: the Wavit is actually available for purchase. UltimatePointer's product, the Upoint, is <a href="http://www.ultimatepointer.com/online-shop.aspx" target="_blank">still under "testing"</a>, so many years later.  Why bother building an actual product if you can just score a patent and sue those who <i>really</i> understand the technology?  Once again, we are left to ponder the process that allows a company to be sued for independently developing similar technology to another prior to it being patented. This really does not breed confidence in the technology market.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110929/09472516135/no-rest-productive-successful-nintendo-sued-again-over-wii-remote.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110929/09472516135/no-rest-productive-successful-nintendo-sued-again-over-wii-remote.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110929/09472516135/no-rest-productive-successful-nintendo-sued-again-over-wii-remote.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>another-patent-suit</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110929/09472516135</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 13 Sep 2011 11:54:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Nintendo Wii Accused Of Willfully Infringing Patent That Was Applied For After Wii Was Introduced</title>
<dc:creator>Zachary Knight</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110908/09364115848/nintendo-wii-accused-willfully-infringing-patent-that-was-applied-after-wii-was-introduced.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110908/09364115848/nintendo-wii-accused-willfully-infringing-patent-that-was-applied-after-wii-was-introduced.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Techcrunch is reporting on yet <a href="http://techcrunch.com/2011/09/07/nintendo-gets-sued-over-the-wii/" target="_blank">another patent dispute</a> over the technology found in Nintendo's Wii video game system. This time the company suing is ThinkOptics, the makers of the Wavit Remote.
<br /><br />
The dispute is over the following patents: <ul> <li><a href="http://www.google.com/patents?id=zyLWAAAAEBAJ&#038;printsec=abstract&#038;source=gbs_overview_r&#038;cad=0#v=onepage&#038;q&#038;f=false" target="_blank">7,796,116</a>: Electronic equipment for handheld vision based absolute pointing system</li> <li><a href="http://www.google.com/patents?id=7qflAAAAEBAJ&#038;printsec=abstract&#038;source=gbs_overview_r&#038;cad=0#v=onepage&#038;q&#038;f=false" target="_blank">7,852,317</a>: Handheld Device for Handheld Vision Based Absolute Pointing System</li> <li> <a href="http://www.google.com/patents?id=Ni_xAAAAEBAJ&#038;printsec=abstract&#038;source=gbs_overview_r&#038;cad=0#v=onepage&#038;q&#038;f=false" target="_blank">7,864,159</a>; Handheld Vision Based Absolute Pointing System.</li> </ul> Notice a trend yet?
<br /><br />
What is probably not surprising is that this patent dispute is being filed in the patent troll haven of East Texas. Along with Nintendo, ThinkOptics is suing Nyko, a maker of third party Wii Remotes, Gamestop and Radio Shack, both of whom sell the Wii and accessories, and finally JC Penny, for being over priced and of low quality, I guess. Not sure why other retail outlets aren't being sued.
<br /><br />
ThinkOptics' primary argument for how Nintendo willfully infringed on their patents is that Nintendo's own patent applications were rejected. <blockquote><i>The rejection of [...] applications &mdash; assigned to Nintendo Co. Ltd. &mdash; based on the &rsquo;116 patent is proof that the Nintendo defendants knew or should have known of the objective risk that one or more of their products infringed at least one claim of at least the &rsquo;116 Patent.</i></blockquote> The dates involved are what makes this suit interesting. Of the three patents behind the dispute two were granted in 2010 and one is 2011. All three, however, were applied for in July of 2005, <b>two months after</b> Nintendo first <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_E3#2005" target="_blank">introduced the Wii</a> to the public at the 2005 E3 conference.
<br /><br />
With these dates in mind, how could Nintendo possibly have known they were infringing on a patent when that patent was not even applied for prior to the first public announcement of the technology? What this situation shows is the need for an <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070116/151246.shtml" target="_blank">independent invention defense</a> in the patent system. Here we have two companies developing similar technologies at the same time. There was no public information from either company prior to the patent filing to indicate that someone else was making this technology. Why should one of these companies be punished for treble damage for not finding information that was unavailable at the time of development?
<br /><br />
It will be interesting to see what comes of this lawsuit. It will also be interesting to see how many more companies will sue over the Wii.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110908/09364115848/nintendo-wii-accused-willfully-infringing-patent-that-was-applied-after-wii-was-introduced.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110908/09364115848/nintendo-wii-accused-willfully-infringing-patent-that-was-applied-after-wii-was-introduced.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110908/09364115848/nintendo-wii-accused-willfully-infringing-patent-that-was-applied-after-wii-was-introduced.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>wii-need-an-independent-invention-defense</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110908/09364115848</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 2 Mar 2011 01:58:01 PST</pubDate>
<title>Ubisoft Uses 'Copyright' Claim To Block Americans From Seeing Its Own Ad For Ridiculous 'Adult' Wii Game</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110226/12424913272/ubisoft-uses-copyright-claim-to-block-americans-seeing-its-own-ad-ridiculous-adult-wii-game.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110226/12424913272/ubisoft-uses-copyright-claim-to-block-americans-seeing-its-own-ad-ridiculous-adult-wii-game.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/profile.php?u=gindil">Jay</a> points us to the news that Ubisoft is offering up a new video game for the Wii, in Europe only, called "We Dare," which appears to be a ridiculously awkwardness-inducing game designed to try to <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/digitaltrends/20110224/tc_digitaltrends/ubisoftwedaregamebringsawkwardeighthgradepartiestotheconsole">make people engage in sexually suggestive activities</a> with one another.  Since the game is only being offered in Europe, the advertisement for the game, which the company placed on its own YouTube account, is blocked for viewing in the US -- though, ridiculously, it says this is so for "copyright" reasons.  Still, it's not hard for people to find proxies to view the video (took me a few seconds to convince YouTube I was watching the video from Europe).  It seems sort of pointless to block the video from US audiences, even if they can't order the game.  The ad itself is hilariously painful to watch, and the comments on the video (also only available if you're "outside" the US) are almost universally mocking Ubisoft for this game concept.  Anyway, if you're inside the US or don't know how to use a proxy, you won't be able to watch the video below.  And you might be better off for it:
<center>
<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="560" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Bxd96qRa6wY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
</center><br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110226/12424913272/ubisoft-uses-copyright-claim-to-block-americans-seeing-its-own-ad-ridiculous-adult-wii-game.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110226/12424913272/ubisoft-uses-copyright-claim-to-block-americans-seeing-its-own-ad-ridiculous-adult-wii-game.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110226/12424913272/ubisoft-uses-copyright-claim-to-block-americans-seeing-its-own-ad-ridiculous-adult-wii-game.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>we-dare?</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110226/12424913272</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 26 Aug 2009 03:22:32 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Nintendo Pays Innovation Tax To Patent Holder</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090826/0111055998.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090826/0111055998.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ A year ago, we noted that Hillcrest Labs was <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080820/1241462048.shtml">going after Nintendo</a>, claiming that the Wii violated its patents.  And, like so many other patent holders, Hillcrest got to take two separate cracks at Nintendo, suing in court and <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080702/1117121576.shtml">also</a> filing with the ITC to block imports.  Recognizing just how ridiculously costly it is to defend both the lawsuit and the ITC process, it looks like <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&#038;sid=aAglvb3vyk38" target="_new">Nintendo has just agreed to pay up</a>.  The company still insists that the Wii doesn't infringe, but the system is stacked against companies who actually innovate.  It's so costly to defend yourself, that it's usually just cheaper to settle.  Consider it a tax on innovation... except the tax doesn't even go to anything useful.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090826/0111055998.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090826/0111055998.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090826/0111055998.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>good-for-innovation?</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090826/0111055998</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 12 Jun 2009 03:38:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Nintendo Wii Doesn't Infringe On DVD Playing/Parental Control Patent</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090612/0024375203.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090612/0024375203.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ It's nice to see a patent lawsuit go in the right direction.  A judge in LA has <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-10263131-1.html?part=rss&#038;subj=news&#038;tag=2547-1_3-0-20" target="_new">tossed out a patent infringement lawsuit against Nintendo</a> concerning parental controls on DVD players.  The only problem?  The Wii doesn't play DVDs.  Of course, Nintendo still faces a number of other patent infringement lawsuits, but at least this one was dealt with relatively quickly.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090612/0024375203.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090612/0024375203.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090612/0024375203.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>good-news</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090612/0024375203</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 23 Mar 2009 12:50:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Two And A Half Years Later, Wii Shortages Start To Let Up</title>
<dc:creator>Carlo Longino</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090320/1538114202.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090320/1538114202.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ The shortages that accompanied the launch of the Nintendo Wii weren't too surprising, since they seem to be <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20061121/115618.shtml">par for the course</a> for any new game console these days. What was a little surprising was just how long the shortages lasted after the Wii's late 2006 introduction. If you still haven't had a chance to find a Wii in-stock, your wait should soon be over, as an exec from the retailer GameStop says they <a href="http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=22805">"finally have enough inventory on the shelf"</a> (via <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/wii-shortage-finally-nearing-its-end-says-gamestop-exec/">Engadget</a>), and the shortage of Wiis should be letting up. Clearly the Wii has been a huge hit, but it would seem that Nintendo could have gotten a handle on its production output in less than, eh, two and a half years. There's also speculation that the <a href="http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/DN-gamer_0329gl.ART.State.Edition1.464cd43.html">weakness of the dollar</a> was leading Nintendo to send Wiis to places like Europe with stronger currencies (and hence more profits when Nintendo converts foreign currencies back into yen). Or did Nintendo just leverage the scarcity so it would contribute to the Wii's appeal?<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090320/1538114202.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090320/1538114202.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090320/1538114202.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>still-no-wii-fit</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090320/1538114202</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 19 Feb 2009 18:22:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>The Wii Might Not Be Much Exercise, But Suing Nintendo For Self-Promotion Is</title>
<dc:creator>Carlo Longino</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090212/1323363751.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090212/1323363751.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ The Nintendo Wii has been the subject of class-action lawsuits <a href="http://techdirt.com/articles/20061220/082413.shtml">before</a>, but this could be a new low: some guy now claims he's preparing another one for the company to deal with, because he alleges Nintendo <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/12/fitness-guru-prepares-to-launch-wii-fit-class-action-suit-radio/">misrepresents the Wii as a fitness tool</a> when it actually contributes to obesity. He equates Nintendo to tobacco companies misrepresenting the safety of their products, but as Engadget points out, he's not just some do-gooder concerned about the health of America, he's also somebody who makes his living from it, and apparently has a fitness radio show that's about to launch. Somehow it's hard to imagine this suit will get anywhere; but we also imagine it was never really meant to anyway.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090212/1323363751.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090212/1323363751.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090212/1323363751.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>and-1-and-2-and-file-and-sue</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090212/1323363751</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 9 Feb 2009 18:36:17 PST</pubDate>
<title>Don't Say You Weren't Warned About How Dangerous The Wii Can Be</title>
<dc:creator>Carlo Longino</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090205/1717193663.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090205/1717193663.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ When the Nintendo Wii first came out, there were lots of stories talking about how it was causing users <a href="http://techdirt.com/articles/20061201/081418.shtml">physical pain</a>, and it was blamed for an increasing number of <a href="http://techdirt.com/articles/20080107/11344144.shtml">ER visits</a>. Further proof that the Wii can be harmful to your health comes out of Austin, Texas, where a guy has been accused of <a href="http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/blotter/entries/2009/02/04/man_accused_of_choking_girlfri.html">trying to choke his girlfriend with a Wiimote strap</a> -- after she woke him up and accused him of eating all of her Girl Scout cookies. Nintendo's already been sued once for making the Wiimote's wrist strap <a href="http://techdirt.com/articles/20061220/082413.shtml">too weak</a>; we won't hang around to see if another lawyer alleges they've now made it too strong.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090205/1717193663.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090205/1717193663.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090205/1717193663.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>domestic-tranquility</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090205/1717193663</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:11:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>Nintendo Making Peripherals Impossible To Buy Used</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081114/1605052837.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081114/1605052837.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ An anonymous reader points us to some news concerning the latest skirmish in the battle over used goods in the video game industry.  As we've noted, various execs have been <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081103/0110102711.shtml">freaking out</a> over secondhand sales, despite tons of economic evidence that a robust secondhand market increases the value of the original offerings.  In this case, it appears that Nintendo is selling a "Wii Speak" microphone that can be used with certain games, but in order to use it, you need to download the "Wii Speak Channel" which can only be downloaded with a code supplied with the Wii Speak (<b>Update</b>: as noted in the comments, this description isn't quite accurate.  You can still use the Wii Speak in the game, but the Wii Channel is needed to use it outside of the game).  And here's the sneaky part: <a href="http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2008/11/12/wii-speak-channel-only-for-wii-speak-purchasers/" target="_new">that code can only be used once</a>.  Effectively, it's impossible to resell the Wii Speak, because you can't use it unless it's been purchased new.  This is pretty dumb, as it certainly decreases the value of the device, and will make plenty of folks think twice before committing to it, knowing that it can't be resold.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081114/1605052837.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081114/1605052837.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081114/1605052837.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>sneaky,-sneaky,-sneaky</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20081114/1605052837</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 2 Oct 2008 09:10:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>How To Do Advertising On YouTube: Make It Awesome</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081001/1811342433.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081001/1811342433.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ In the past, as we've talked about how <a href="http://techdirt.com/articles/20080910/0303152220.shtml">advertising is content</a> and content is advertising, we've pointed out that many folks who worry about "advertising" on YouTube are missing out on the fact that the YouTube videos are <a href="http://techdirt.com/articles/20070612/185649.shtml">advertising themselves</a>.  But, of course, with millions and millions of videos on YouTube, it helps to do something special.  Our own Tim Lee sent over this example of a YouTube video about a Nintendo Wii game that's <a href="http://www.youtube.com/experiencewii" target="_new">worth watching in its entirety</a>, just to see what happens.  Can't say much more about it, other than that you should watch the whole thing.  It acts as fantastic content and fantastic advertising in a single shot -- without "overlays" or "prerolls" or anything like that.  It's yet another example of how a YouTube video fits in when people recognizes that content is advertising... and advertising is content.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081001/1811342433.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081001/1811342433.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081001/1811342433.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>content-equals-advertising</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20081001/1811342433</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2008 14:11:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>And Of Course: Nintendo Sued For Patent Infringement Over Wii Devices</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080820/1241462048.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080820/1241462048.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ These days it's almost guaranteed: if you do something innovative in the tech world, bringing a new type of product to market successfully, get ready for that lawsuit.  If anything, it's almost surprising that this lawsuit wasn't filed earlier, but research firm HillCrest Labs <a href="http://gigaom.com/2008/08/20/hillcrest-labs-nintendos-wii-infringing-our-patents/" target="_new">has sued Nintendo for patent infringement</a> over its Wii controller.  And, of course, HillCrest gets <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080702/1117121576.shtml">two cracks</a> at it, since the company is using the popular loophole to both file a lawsuit in court and ask the International Trade Commission (ITC) for an injunction against Nintendo.
<br /><br />
At this point, plenty of companies are recognizing that it's just too expensive to actually innovate.  If you do something well, you're only going to get sued by someone else who hasn't been able to innovate as well as you.  While we can point to the various examples of companies getting sued, it's also worth thinking about all the companies who don't even bother to innovate, recognizing it's just not worth the expense of these lawsuits.  The patent system is functioning in exactly the opposite manner from its constitutional purpose.  It's not promoting the progress, it's hindering it by making sure that "progress" has a toll booth attached to it.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080820/1241462048.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080820/1241462048.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080820/1241462048.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>only-a-matter-of-time</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20080820/1241462048</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2008 11:51:54 PDT</pubDate>
<title>The Wii Is Popular, But Wii Users Aren't Buying Many Games</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080421/131636905.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080421/131636905.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ The traditional economics of the video game console market are fairly well known.  You sell the console itself at either cut rate margins or even at a loss, and then make it up in selling very expensive games for the console.   That's worked in the past for the various version of the Sony Playstation and the Microsoft Xbox.  But, apparently things are a bit different with the Nintendo Wii.  While the Wii has been a huge success, opening up a tremendous new market of console buyers and users thanks to its unique input mechanism and gameplay, it turns out that <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/21/technology/21wii.html?ex=1366430400&#038;en=c909043e0add2948&#038;ei=5090&#038;partner=rssuserland&#038;emc=rss&#038;pagewanted=all" target="_new">Wii owners are buying noticeably fewer games</a> than owners of competing consoles.  In fact, it appears that many Wii owners haven't bought any games and are satisfied with the Wii Sports package that comes with the Wii.  At this point, I should admit that I'm in this group as well, though part of the reason is simply not knowing which types of games are likely to work well with the Wii controller.  As such, it's not worth spending a huge amount to find a game that's simply disappointing.  The article suggests, also, that since Wii buyers tend to be very different than other console buyers, the marketing and advertising strategy for Wii games is all wrong.  The real question, though, is whether or not this is really a long term problem.  The Wii itself (unlike the PS3 and the Xbox) is sold at a profit, according to most assumptions.  So, while selling more games is important, it's not as important as with the other consoles.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080421/131636905.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080421/131636905.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080421/131636905.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>wii-sports-is-plenty</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20080421/131636905</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 15 Jan 2008 17:17:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>Latest Pointless Patent Claims: Who Invented The Wii Controller?</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080115/002305.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080115/002305.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ One of the problems we have in the various discussions about patent and copyright law is that people falsely assume that both systems are designed to give "credit" to the original creator and to somehow enforce "fairness" in making sure that original creator receives recognition.  That has never been the case.  Both are designed to create monopolies, to provide incentives to create.  That has nothing to do with credit -- and, that's especially clear in patent situations where the actual people named on the patent are rarely parties to a case, as it's more often owned by a firm (such as the company the person worked for).  Most companies require that their employees assign any patents to the company.  So it seems fairly ridiculous to find out that a guy who doesn't actually own the patents he received is <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/14/ex-midway-guy-suing-nintendo-for-wiimote-controls-has-himself-s/">pissed off at Nintendo for using his idea in their Wii controllers</a>.  The guy worked for Midway Games, a popular videogame maker, who now owns the patents in question.  It's difficult to see what his complaint is, since the patents are no longer his and Midway does not appear to have any problem with what Nintendo has done.  In the <a href="http://www.myfoxchicago.com/myfox/pages/Home/Detail?contentId=5478742&#038;version=1&#038;locale=EN-US&#038;layoutCode=VSTY&#038;pageId=1.1.1">video itself</a>, a patent attorney suggests that the Wii seems to go well beyond the patents in question and it seems unlikely that Nintendo is infringing -- but since the few second demo looks similar, it makes for a nice news cast claiming someone "stole" an idea.
<br /><br />
The likely situation is probably a lot less interesting.  Lots of folks have been working on motion sensing videogame controllers for quite some time.  This wasn't a new concept that sprung up overnight.  There are also many different ways to create such a tool and just because the end results look similar, don't mean that a patent was infringed.  However, an even bigger point is one that we've been trying to drive home for a while.  The invention part is only one small part of the equation.  Innovating and actually <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060511/1856233.shtml">bringing</a> the product to market is more important -- and that's what Nintendo did successfully.  This guy worked for a gaming company and came up with a prototype six years ago and didn't do anything with it.  While lots of folks were trying to come up with motion sensing gaming devices, Nintendo successfully brought one to market.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080115/002305.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080115/002305.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080115/002305.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>you-need-to-own-a-patent-to-enforce-it</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20080115/002305</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 8 Jan 2008 13:47:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>Wiinjuries On The Rise, But Still Probably Not The Most Dangerous Thing In Your House</title>
<dc:creator>Dennis Yang</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080107/11344144.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080107/11344144.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Back in 2006, Detroit Tigers relief pitcher Joel Zumaya almost missed the ALCS playoffs due to an injury, caused not by hurling baseballs at 100+ miles per hour, but by <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20061214/145159.shtml">excessive video game playing</a> of the popular guitar simulation, <i>Guitar Hero</i>.  Fast forward a few years, and once again, there are now reports of an <a href="http://www.wftv.com/health/14978010/detail.html">increased number of injuries as a result of playing the Nintendo Wii</a>, due to the more physically involved play associated with the new game system.  The reports do seem a bit alarmist, however.  Anyone that has actually played with the Wii quickly learns to control themselves (and also learns that the excessive movement that could potentially cause injury is actually not even needed).  Even Nintendo's own study has shown that <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071221/160846.shtml">Wii playing is not great exercise</a>, so it is highly unlikely that anyone is really going to heed the article's advice and <i>stretch</i> prior to playing Wii.  The article mentions an increase in the number of Wii-related ER cases, but fails to give any supporting data to this anecdote.  So, until some supporting numbers are published to prove the contrary, it is probably a safe bet that rollerblades cause more ER visits than Wiis.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080107/11344144.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080107/11344144.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080107/11344144.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>go-outside-and-play</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20080107/11344144</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 26 Dec 2007 06:58:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>Nintendo's Own Study Show Wii Not So Great As Exercise</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071221/160846.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071221/160846.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ There's been a little buzz around the news of a new study in the UK pointing out that playing games on the Nintendo Wii really <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7155342.stm">isn't a particularly good substitute for real exercise</a>, as some Wii-players would like to believe (and I'll admit that I'm guilty of playing some Wii boxing in lieu of real exercise).  However, what may be even more interesting is the fact that <a href="http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20071221-study-wii-gaming-no-substitute-for-exercise-fatso.html">the study was actually paid for by Nintendo</a>.  Perhaps we've just become so cynical about corporate "studies" like this in the past, that it's relatively shocking to find one paid for by a company that shows the opposite of what the company probably hoped to see -- and then to still see that study actually published somewhere.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071221/160846.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071221/160846.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071221/160846.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>honest-results!</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20071221/160846</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>