Nintendo Co., Ltd. (ADR) (OTC: NTDOY)'s Wii game console continuet to burn up the sales charts, selling hundreds of thousands every month. In fact, the lower-priced and graphically-inferior Wii has blown through almost every sales expectation since its release nearly two years ago. Last month, the Wii was responsible for 49% of all game consoles, and it's sold nearly 30 million since its November 2006 launch. Wow.

But, with success comes a large target on the back. Nintendo has been named in a patent lawsuit claiming the Japanese gaming company. Hillcrest Technologies says that Nintendo has violated various patents it holds dealing with the wireless, dimension-aware gaming controller that ships with every Wii console.

The "Wiimote," as it has been dubbed, uses gyroscopes, Bluetooth wireless technology, and is incredibly simplistic on the surface (there are a minimum of buttons, unlike the competition). But inside the Wiimote, the technology making it possible to swing it like a tennis racket is quite complex. Hillcrest's claim rests primarily on wireless technology it invented to allow the physical motion of a controller to select items on a viewing monitor. Hillcrest has already licensed its technology to several gaming companies, but the question remains: why did it take almost two years to bring the lawsuit against Nintendo? Something smells here.

MAJOR PAPERS:

• This year, the International Trade Commission is set to issue rulings on whether Samsung and Nokia Corporation (NYSE: NOK) have infringed patents from InterDigital Inc (NASDAQ: IDCC). If InterDigital, who licenses its patents to iPhone maker Apple Inc (NASDAQ: AAPL), wins, fees from the deals could double its revenue over the next few years, the Wall Street Journal contended.
• The Wall Street Journal also reported that Macy's Inc (NYSE: M) is among the retailers that include The Home Depot Inc (NYSE: HD) and Sears Holdings Corporation (NASDAQ: SHLD) to stop making its monthly disclosure of retail sales.

OTHER PAPERS:

• According to FDA commissioners, the New York Times reported that Baxter International Inc's (NYSE: BAX) critical blood thinner heparin, which has been linked to nearly 20 deaths and whose base was created in China, contained a "possibly counterfeit" ingredient that "mimicked the real drug."
• In his opening arguments in the state of Alaska's lawsuit against Eli Lilly & Company (NYSE: LLY), an attorney for the state alleged the drug maker failed to warn doctors and patients of dangerous side effects associated with its drug Zyprexa, the Associated Press reported.

The International Trade Commission (ITC) has banned imports of some cell phones containing chip technology from Qualcomm (NASDAQ: QCOM). The ITC has said that the ban covers cell phones that infringe on a patent held by Broadcom (NASDAQ: BRCM) and that were imported for sale after June 7. The majority of the cell phone import world is up in arms, claiming that the ban will do irreparable harm to the American consumer. Frankly, those that choose to infringe on patents shouldn't be importing technology they aren't ready to sit on when discovered.

James Gerace, spokesman for Verizon Wireless, claims that the ban "essentially attempts to freeze innovation in cell phones." A more accurate interpretation would be that the ban seeks to freeze piracy that circumvents innovation. A Red Herring article says that Sprint Nextel (NYSE: S) has openly declared that it expects to sell 5 million phones this year that contain the infringing technology. That's a pretty bold statement by Sprint, and in light of the current ban, I think it's a pretty stupid statement also. That would be similar to me stopping at the local police station to tell them I plan on driving over the speed limit for 500 miles this year.

AT&T (NYSE: T) doesn't seem to care much about the cell phone ban. It has plenty of handsets available that don't contain the infringing chips. AT&T thought ahead and based the majority of its offering on a different technology. Might we call that decision prudent?

Meanwhile, as the pirates cry and whine about appeals and a stay of execution, Broadcom has eloquently made clear that it will consider discussion about licensing of the patent.