PlayStation 5 faceplate seller cancels pre-orders following Sony's Legal Threats

[WYP]

Sorry Sony fans, I guess your PS5 has to be white at launch...



Read more about Sony taking down 3rd party PS5 faceplate replacements.

 

[looz]

So they deliberately design the plates to be easily replaveable, but then deny it legally.
Absolute nonsense, these are essentially spare parts and third parties should be allowed to sell those as they please. As long as it's clear to the customers that they're third party products.

Should be no different from cars IMO.

 

[NeverBackDown]

They aren't denying anything? Just because they don't want others to make parts for a console that's not released doesn't mean they are denying anything about the plates

 

[spolsh]

They're denying playmate or whatever from making faceplates.

 

[Dicehunter]

A few years ago someone, Can't remember who now, Said that the likes of Sony and Nintendo are in the hands of fat old out of touch men who only care about their bottom line.

Things like this just cement that sentiment.

I remember when the Xbox 360 came out and dozens of different companies came out with various faceplates and MS did nothing other than give them a big thumbs up as it got more people in on the Xbox brand.

 

[NeverBackDown]

They're denying playmate or whatever from making faceplates.

Thats not what he was saying. Sony denying OTHERS to make faceplates is not Sony denying they are replaceable.

I don't see why anyone thinks its a big deal. The console isn't even out yet, Sony would be wise to make this move to prevent anyone from trying to make money off Sony's customers before they even have a console. They are protecting their reputation. 3rd party or not most people are clueless.

Sony has allowed and even partnered with others to make accessories before. It's really not a big deal and people are just over reacting.

After the console releases I'm sure more accessories will be able to be made.

 

[looz]

Lol, obviously I meant that Sony is denying others from making replacements, not denying that they're replaceable.

And "partnership" means that Sony gets to dictate what's OK and what isn't, and in addition takes a licensing fee. That's anti-consumer, and IMO shouldn't be allowed. If people buy the console, they should be allowed to mod it however they please. Sony in turn can deny warranty if the mods were a reasonable cause for the issues, since of course they shouldn't be burdened by people being idiots.

But this is simply a scheme to seize profits by selling official Sony sanctioned plates.

 

[Digikid]

Very disappointing and incredibly stupid of sony to do this. Unbelievable!!!!

 

[NeverBackDown]

Lol, obviously I meant that Sony is denying others from making replacements, not denying that they're replaceable.

And "partnership" means that Sony gets to dictate what's OK and what isn't, and in addition takes a licensing fee. That's anti-consumer, and IMO shouldn't be allowed. If people buy the console, they should be allowed to mod it however they please. Sony in turn can deny warranty if the mods were a reasonable cause for the issues, since of course they shouldn't be burdened by people being idiots.

But this is simply a scheme to seize profits by selling official Sony sanctioned plates.

Good thing I also said they "allowed" in addition to partnership.

You can find tons of ps4 accessories online. It's not difficult. You want a partnership example? Scuff controllers acting as the elite controller for a couple years.

You're just grasping at straws. Sony has allowed it even back in ps3 days. You can buy skins for ps3/4 as well. The difference is the Consoles have been out, this console isn't.

Nothing anti consumer here at all. Everybody complaining about accessories when the console isn't even out yet. Why not just wait for a few months after release to form an opinion? Or let me guess everything that requires a license is anti consumer no matter what right? Wonder how you view ARM then. Or wonder how you feel about both MS and Sony partnership with Seagate for HDDs. That's rhetorical and sarcasm.

 

[looz]

Why is the console not being released relevant? You expect them to back off after release? We'll see how that turns out.

 

[Warchild]

Why is the console not being released relevant? You expect them to back off after release? We'll see how that turns out.

Well I see very little (if any) official third party accessories being marketted yet, so its quite possibly thats true.

We dont see Razer, Nacon, etc selling PS5 controllers yet do we? Can guarantee they will flood the market after the launch.

Time will tell what happens, but I cannot see any company blocking these plates for long providing there is no PS logo attached to them. All they have to do is modify the dimensions away from the original and there is no patent infringement either then.

 

[grec]

Well I see very little (if any) official third party accessories being marketted yet, so its quite possibly thats true.

We dont see Razer, Nacon, etc selling PS5 controllers yet do we? Can guarantee they will flood the market after the launch.

Time will tell what happens, but I cannot see any company blocking these plates for long providing there is no PS logo attached to them. All they have to do is modify the dimensions away from the original and there is no patent infringement either then.

Think technically if they work out the mounting apparatus from looking at Sony's designs then they've copied Sony's IP. In order to create these faceplate designs and be completely legally clear they'd need evidence they clean room reverse engineered the apparatus before being exposed to images or documentation on Sony's actual design, which is ofc borderline impossible (They'd need an engineer/group to create a specification of the mounting apparatus for a second engineer/group to design from at the very least).

Think we all know Sony's issue here isn't that these guys are making the plates, it's that Sony isn't profiting from the plates, whether or not Sony are yet ready to officially license the designs I don't know, but I'd assume Sony aren't ready yet for that otherwise that's what PlateStation or whatever would try to do.

 

[Kleptobot]

Odds are Sony couldn't actually do anything to stop these guys making and selling faceplates. But the threat of legal action is generally enough to scare people off because if it did go to court the financial costs will bleed the little guy dry regardless of the outcome.

 

[Greenback]

Odds are Sony couldn't actually do anything to stop these guys making and selling faceplates. But the threat of legal action is generally enough to scare people off because if it did go to court the financial costs will bleed the little guy dry regardless of the outcome.

I'd assume it depends on how well sony patented it

 

[Kleptobot]

Patents only stand up when there is some demonstrable innovation. If there are other products that incorporate panels that can be removed and re attached in a similar way that are already being sold, patents mean nothing.

 

[AlienALX]

I'd assume it depends on how well sony patented it

I would imagine very well.

If they are going to lose money on console sales for two or so years (as they usually do) then fair play to them for reserving their removable panels to themselves or license.

It could well be things like that where they make profit.

 

[Warchild]

Patents only stand up when there is some demonstrable innovation. If there are other products that incorporate panels that can be removed and re attached in a similar way that are already being sold, patents mean nothing.

You are allowed to patent almost anything now. Think of the gray band on the apple iphone6. Purely cosmetic but still allowed them to take a fierce battle with samsung over infringement.

They also claimed that the curvature of the bezel was the same as the galaxy. Again nothing but cosmetic variations that had little reference to innovation.

 

[grec]

Intellectual Property doesn't just refer to patents (Which are generally/should be only given for innovations), but also copyright, designs and trade marks. You don't need to file any patent or register anything to be able to exercise your copyright on a design, anything you/(a business) creates is copyrighted to you/(said business) as it is your/(their) design (and therefore IP), nothing more has to be done prior, you can claim someone is infringing on your designs/IP with no prior formal registration of said designs, any case is dealt with as it comes.

Generally it is expected that if a company decides to take infringements to court, then they should be able to show they have been active in protecting from infringements previously and taken all action where possible to make defendants aware of issues before they reach that stage, so the lawyers won't let this kind of stuff slide incase something bigger comes along.

 

[Kleptobot]

You are allowed to patent almost anything now. Think of the gray band on the apple iphone6. Purely cosmetic but still allowed them to take a fierce battle with samsung over infringement.

They also claimed that the curvature of the bezel was the same as the galaxy. Again nothing but cosmetic variations that had little reference to innovation.

Being allowed to patent something and the legitimacy of the patent are not equivalent.

As for the infamous lawsuit between Samsung and Apple that was over more than just cosmetic similarities. It encompassed UI features, such as tap to zoom and bounce back, as well as the physical appearance of the devices, things like the speaker notch.

tgrech is right about intellectual property being separate to patents, and that litigation is unfortunately the main protection for it. Meaning that the people with the biggest sticks tend to win most of the time and the little guy just has to pull his head in for fear of being whacked.

I seriously doubt sony would win if neither side backed down or ran out of money if it did end up in the courts. But if you were a small design/manufacturing company and sony hit you with a cease and desist, would you be game to call their bluff?