Skip to main content

Microsoft Facing Lawsuit Over Kinect Technology

Virginia-based Intelligent Verification Systems has filed a complaint in federal court against Microsoft over the Kinect motion sensing device for Xbox 360 and Windows PC. The company is represented by Michael Mutter with Birch, Stewart, Kolasch & Birch in Falls Church, Va.

According to the lawsuit, the company's '073 patent, "Animated Toy Utilizing Artificial Intelligence and Facial Image Recognition," was issued in 2006. This patent protects expression- and facial-recognition technology with applications, and even notes that it's suited for video games, consoles, and other entertainment systems.

However Intelligent Verification Systems (IVS) also claims this invention is the first of its kind, that facial recognition technology was only used in the security sector prior to the patent. Microsoft's Kinect peripheral, which supposedly infringes on that patent, was first introduced on the Xbox 360 back in November 2010, around four years after the IVS patent.

The court filing states that lawyers representing IVS contacted Microsoft in a June 2011 letter, alerting the Redmond company about the patent infringement. But so far there has been no response, and Microsoft is currently making millions in increased revenue from the stolen technology (and reportedly storing a good chunk in offshore bank accounts to avoid taxes). To drive the stake in even further, IVS points out that Kinect even achieved a Guinness World Record as the "fastest selling consumer electronics device."

Microsoft isn't the only Kinect-related company within firing range. IVS also listed Majesco Entertainment in its lawsuit, as its game "Zumba Fitness Rush" benefits from the supposed stolen technology. Currently it's unclear whether IVS plans to go after other Kinect developers "benefiting from the infringement."

Naturally the company wants to see Kinect and Zumba Fitness Rush banned from store shelves, seeking an injunction. IVS also wants a written acknowledge from both companies within 30 days after the complaint was filed, a jury trial and treble damages – or rather, triple the amount of damages typically awarded in a similar patent infringement case.

As of this writing, Microsoft has not issued a statement.

Contact Us for News Tips, Corrections and Feedback

  • dark_wizzie
    Stop suing everybody. Jesus.
    Reply
  • slabbo
    Oh boy, need more details on that patent to see if they really infringed on it. I'm pretty sure MS patented Kinect too. They (patent office) really need to double check patents to make sure they don't overlap with each other before they give them out. So why are there 2 patents out there with the same things? I also wouldn't be shocked if MS did infringe and went ahead with Kinect anyway.
    Reply
  • memadmax
    This doesn't surprise me one bit, except the fact that its prolly some fly by night company that doesn't do anything but hold patents *instead* of apple...
    Reply
  • Thunderfox
    Patenting random combinations of concepts should not be legal. Isn't there supposed to be some sort of rule against patenting obvious things? It seems obvious that AI would be used in toys, and it seems obvious that facial recognition would be used in anything that uses AI.

    If this company patented this in 2006, why have they not released an actual product by now? Are they even in the business of making anything, or are they just another patent holding company that needs to be outlawed?
    Reply
  • A Bad Day
    slabboOh boy, need more details on that patent to see if they really infringed on it. I'm pretty sure MS patented Kinect too. They (patent office) really need to double check patents to make sure they don't overlap with each other before they give them out. So why are there 2 patents out there with the same things? I also wouldn't be shocked if MS did infringe and went ahead with Kinect anyway.
    It's going to be interesting if there are two conflicting patents. Hehe.
    Reply
  • timaishu
    Did this company actually make something utilizing the patent? Is so, then maybe they have a case. If not, they need to stfu.
    Reply
  • ankaj
    Anyone know if there is a real website for them? A quick google search brought up a facebook page, and mention of them on a business site, but other than that nothing except them vs microsoft.
    Reply
  • livebriand
    ankajAnyone know if there is a real website for them? A quick google search brought up a facebook page, and mention of them on a business site, but other than that nothing except them vs microsoft.http://ivs-biometrics.com/ (from their FB page)
    Reply
  • esrever
    There need to be some laws against this kind of BS. Patents like these need to be implemented and technical or else you'd just have a counter progress system. Im not sure who holds the patent for making patents but that person really should just sue all these people.
    Reply
  • gilgamex
    slabboOh boy, need more details on that patent to see if they really infringed on it. I'm pretty sure MS patented Kinect too. They (patent office) really need to double check patents to make sure they don't overlap with each other before they give them out. So why are there 2 patents out there with the same things? I also wouldn't be shocked if MS did infringe and went ahead with Kinect anyway.
    Are you aware of just how many patents exist? It's a vast vast world of patents, I'm inclined to think that it is highly likely to infringe a patent without even meaning to. And to think of how hard it is to organize such a diverse and specifically worded world of patents seems brain hemmoraging just to think about let alone accomplish. Though I'm not citing this as the reason but just a rebuttal to that thinking in general
    Reply