Atari v. Sega
From Sega Retro
|
| Atari Corp. v. Sega of America, Inc. |
|---|
| Court: United States District Court for the Northern District of California |
| Argued: 1994-08-12[1] |
| Decided: 1994-09 (settlement)[2] |
| Citation(s): 869 F. Supp. 783 (N.D. Cal. 1994)[1] |
| Judge(s) sitting: Claudia Ann Wilken[1] |
This short article is in need of work. You can help Sega Retro by adding to it.
Atari Corp. v. Sega of America, Inc., 869 F. Supp. 783 (N.D. Cal. 1994), is a 1994 case in which Atari Corporation sued Sega of America alleging infringement of a 1984 Atari patent involving "horizontal scrolling on a video display."[2]
History
In October 1993, Atari Corporation filed a lawsuit against Sega of America alleging infringement of a 1984 patent involving "horizontal scrolling on a video display." The company sought a preliminary injunction that would have halted the manufacture, use, and sale of Genesis and Game Gear hardware and software.[2]
Result
In September 1994, both companies agreed to a settlement. Sega Enterprises would acquire $40 million worth of stock in Atari Corporation and would also pay Atari $50 million for a license to use over 70 patents issued between 1977 and 1984. Both agreed to cross-license up to five games per year through 2001, and to drop all claims against each other.[2] Due to corporate turmoil, Atari would ultimately not produce any games for the Jaguar with these licenses, while Sega would license Centipede, Ultra Pong, and Missile Command for the 1996 Mega Drive and Game Gear compilation Arcade Classics.
Legacy
One of the 70 licenses of concern to Atari v. Sega was Atari's DB9 joystick port, the controller port featured on the Mega Drive. This case is considered to be the driving reason behind the controller port's replacement with a proprietary design on the Sega Saturn forward.[3]
Around August 2017, the list of potential cross-licenses sent by Sega to Atari Corporation was uploaded and preserved online. The list proved of great interest to the gaming community, as it contained internal information about which third-parties would be owed royalties for the license - providing insight and confirmations into previously-unknown developers.[2]
Magazine articles
- Main article: Atari v. Sega/Magazine articles.
External links
- Atari v. Sega at Justia Law
- Legal Brief: Atari vs. Sega article by CRV at Game Developer Research Institute
References
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/869/783/1495595/
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 https://gdri.smspower.org/wiki/index.php/Blog:Legal_Brief:_Atari_vs._Sega
- ↑ https://forums.sonicretro.org/index.php?threads%2Fgeneral-questions-and-information-thread.26211%2Fpage-162#post-1080096 (Wayback Machine: 2024-09-16 03:17)