• Announcements

    • khawk

      Download the Game Design and Indie Game Marketing Freebook   07/19/17

      GameDev.net and CRC Press have teamed up to bring a free ebook of content curated from top titles published by CRC Press. The freebook, Practices of Game Design & Indie Game Marketing, includes chapters from The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, and An Architectural Approach to Level Design. The GameDev.net FreeBook is relevant to game designers, developers, and those interested in learning more about the challenges in game development. We know game development can be a tough discipline and business, so we picked several chapters from CRC Press titles that we thought would be of interest to you, the GameDev.net audience, in your journey to design, develop, and market your next game. The free ebook is available through CRC Press by clicking here. The Curated Books The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, Second Edition, by Jesse Schell Presents 100+ sets of questions, or different lenses, for viewing a game’s design, encompassing diverse fields such as psychology, architecture, music, film, software engineering, theme park design, mathematics, anthropology, and more. Written by one of the world's top game designers, this book describes the deepest and most fundamental principles of game design, demonstrating how tactics used in board, card, and athletic games also work in video games. It provides practical instruction on creating world-class games that will be played again and again. View it here. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, by Joel Dreskin Marketing is an essential but too frequently overlooked or minimized component of the release plan for indie games. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing provides you with the tools needed to build visibility and sell your indie games. With special focus on those developers with small budgets and limited staff and resources, this book is packed with tangible recommendations and techniques that you can put to use immediately. As a seasoned professional of the indie game arena, author Joel Dreskin gives you insight into practical, real-world experiences of marketing numerous successful games and also provides stories of the failures. View it here. An Architectural Approach to Level Design This is one of the first books to integrate architectural and spatial design theory with the field of level design. The book presents architectural techniques and theories for level designers to use in their own work. It connects architecture and level design in different ways that address the practical elements of how designers construct space and the experiential elements of how and why humans interact with this space. Throughout the text, readers learn skills for spatial layout, evoking emotion through gamespaces, and creating better levels through architectural theory. View it here. Learn more and download the ebook by clicking here. Did you know? GameDev.net and CRC Press also recently teamed up to bring GDNet+ Members up to a 20% discount on all CRC Press books. Learn more about this and other benefits here.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Sappharos

Patent Violation?

13 posts in this topic

Occasionally while researching means to an end, you stumble across something like this: a [url="http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect2=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/search-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&d=PALL&RefSrch=yes&Query=PN/4710876"]patented algorithm[/url]. This applies to the following: [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marching_cubes"]http://en.wikipedia..../Marching_cubes[/url].

So, logical methods can be copyrighted; flagged as someone else's territory. The only efficient way to do something turns out to be illegal in itself.

And what's more, in the final paragraph: "[i]While the invention has been described in detail herein in accord with certain preferred embodiments thereof, many modifications and changes therein may be effected by those skilled in the art. Accordingly, it is intended by the appended claims to cover all such modifications and changes as fall within the true spirit and scope of the invention.[/i]"

I have a few questions:

1) How likely is it that the owner of the patent will sue a popular company which uses a patented method, or an obscure company which uses it?
2) How much damage can a successful claim on their part do?

Thanks,

Matthew Rule
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Sappharos' timestamp='1328633270' post='4910543']
So, logical methods can be copyrighted
[/quote]

No. They can be patented, but not copyrighted.
2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And ofcourse, the easiest way around software patents is to simply not distribute your software in the countries with broken patent systems. (Software patents by themselves aren't all that bad, it only becomes a real problem when they are granted for insanely obvious things that you are likely to come up with on your own)
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='SimonForsman' timestamp='1328640250' post='4910583']
And ofcourse, the easiest way around software patents is to simply not distribute your software in the countries with broken patent systems.[/quote]
Just as long as you don't mind writing off most of North America and Europe as potential markets :)
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='SimonForsman' timestamp='1328640250' post='4910583']
And ofcourse, the easiest way around software patents is to simply not distribute your software in the countries with broken patent systems. (Software patents by themselves aren't all that bad, it only becomes a real problem when they are granted for insanely obvious things that you are likely to come up with on your own)
[/quote]Whilst it's true that the particularly bad problems come from being granted to things that many developers would independently come up with, I think software patents have some additional issues specific to software:
* Software is already covered by copyright. Whilst an algorithm isn't, it's not like someone can just copy your work (if the source is even available), they have to reimplement it. Unlike a piece of hardware where you could look at every single component and copy it bit by bit.
* The argument for things like drugs patents is the billions it costs to invest - yet software can cost far less, even just a single person writing code for free. This also means that required legal costs to have a lawyer check your code are higher in proportion for software.
* A patent on algorithms seems to me a patent on mathematics.

Software is also arguably in a younger stage that other areas of engineering, and also has a fast rate of progress such that 20 years can have a stifling affect. Much software is dependent on earlier concepts, so a patent on one thing can be a big problem - it's like patenting the screw, or if important bits of mathematics were covered by patents.

[quote name='swiftcoder' timestamp='1328644494' post='4910611']
[quote name='SimonForsman' timestamp='1328640250' post='4910583']
And ofcourse, the easiest way around software patents is to simply not distribute your software in the countries with broken patent systems.[/quote]
Just as long as you don't mind writing off most of North America and Europe as potential markets [img]http://public.gamedev.net//public/style_emoticons/default/smile.png[/img]
[/quote]Where in Europe are pure software patents enforceable?
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='mdwh' timestamp='1328710445' post='4910897']
Where in Europe are pure software patents enforceable?[/quote]
In practice? Maybe nowhere. But as far as I can tell, there is also nowhere in Europe that specifically refuses to grant software patents. The EPO criteria seems to allow for software patents as long as they also demonstrate 'technical innovation' in the traditional sense.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Sappharos' timestamp='1328633270' post='4910543']
1) How likely is it that the owner of the patent will sue a popular company which uses a patented method, or an obscure company which uses it?[/quote]
Depends on the company. Some companies collect and purchase (incredibly stupidly broad) patents for the sole purpose of extorting large fees from companies that 'infringe' on those patents.
[quote]2) How much damage can a successful claim on their part do?[/quote]
Loads. It can cause the collapse of small companies.

The United States patent office didn't want software algorithms to be patentable, but were forced to when companies leaned on the US government which leaned on the United States patent office, and suddenly we have a MAD (mutually assured destruction) arm race of patents, where large companies are snapping up as many patents as possible to defend against other large companies, and to threaten, extort, and suppress smaller companies.

Remember that in America, you don't have to be in the wrong to go bankrupt by a lawsuit... the trial alone is enough, that you might never survive to see the verdict. Corporations with large cash reserves can take advantage of this, having long drawn out lawsuits until their opponents run out of money, regardless of whether they did a single thing wrong or not. (Note: I am not a lawyer, so I may be mistaken about all this. This is just my armchair view of software patents and lawsuits)

[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_Ventures"]Intellectual Ventures[/url]
Listen to this: "[url="http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/441/when-patents-attack"]When patents attack[/url]"
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='swiftcoder' timestamp='1328712543' post='4910910']
[quote name='mdwh' timestamp='1328710445' post='4910897']
Where in Europe are pure software patents enforceable?[/quote]
In practice? Maybe nowhere. But as far as I can tell, there is also nowhere in Europe that specifically refuses to grant software patents. The EPO criteria seems to allow for software patents as long as they also demonstrate 'technical innovation' in the traditional sense.
[/quote]Yes, I believe it is that they can be filed, but not enforced - at least, it's something that comes up in the news every so often about EU politicians voting on the issue, and I don't think this has changed yet (although I may be out of date).

(Not that I'm saying EU is perfect on this front, what with the whole blocking the Samsung Galaxy tab thing...)
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='mdwh' timestamp='1328793774' post='4911286']
Yes, I believe it is that they can be filed, but not enforced[/quote]
Patent enforcement is as much about whether you can afford to defend a patent infringement suit as it is about the legality thereof.

<anecdote>
[indent=1]A friend of mine had a medium-size business selling a novel kind of anchor to yachtsman. He was sued by a major manufacturer of anchors, for patent violation - which he fought successfully, and even broke their patent in the process (by locating prior art). Unfortunately, it didn't do him any good: by the time he won, the legal fees had bankrupted his business and he was forced to close shop and cede the market anyway.[/indent]
</anecdote>
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote][quote]Just as long as you don't mind writing off most of North America and Europe as potential markets [img]http://public.gamedev.net//public/style_emoticons/default/smile.png[/img]
[/quote]Where in Europe are pure software patents enforceable?
[/quote]Nowhere, not even here in Naziland where every shit (even playing a song from a CD that you paid money for in your work place) is regulated, charged, censored, enforced, and criminalized. Incidentially, the enforcability of software patents was on the table the week Poland joined the EU, and the first thing Poland said was "no way, are you kidding us" (thank you, Poland!) after which the totally braindead prospective law was put "back to discussion" (which means something like "probably 10 years").

Though as a patent troll, you can of course go through the shady backdoor of an implementation of a technically innovating business process, and some countries will even allow someone to sue a solely-EU person or company in the US, after US law, and be liable in Europe. Which is truly nonsense, but [url="http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/31597/UKBased_RuneScape_Dev_Jagex_Wins_Patent_Infringement_Lawsuit.php"]entirely possible[/url] :(
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A couple other points..
In your question about damages... there's a difference between inadvertent infringement and willful (you knew there was a patent and did it anyway). For willful infringement, courts (in the US) can award triple damages. That's why many big companies tell their engineers to NEVER research to see if what they're doing is already patented.

Also, if you are sued, there are two basic defenses:
1) non-infringement-- That's making the case that you aren't actually infringing.
2) showing their patent to be invalid (prior art, obviousness, etc.)

1 is the easier case to make-- the presumption is that you are NOT infringing and it is incumbent upon the other party to prove to the court that you are infringing. Sort of "innocent until proven guilty."
2 is harder to make-- there it's opposite-- the presumption is that the patent is valid (since it was granted). it is up to YOU to prove that the patent is not valid and shouldn't have been granted in the first place.

Brian Schmidt
[url="http://www.brianschmidtstudios.com"]Brian Schmidt Studios[/url]
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='swiftcoder' timestamp='1328799529' post='4911319']
[quote name='mdwh' timestamp='1328793774' post='4911286']
Yes, I believe it is that they can be filed, but not enforced[/quote]
Patent enforcement is as much about whether you can afford to defend a patent infringement suit as it is about the legality thereof.

<anecdote>


[indent=1]A friend of mine had a medium-size business selling a novel kind of anchor to yachtsman. He was sued by a major manufacturer of anchors, for patent violation - which he fought successfully, and even broke their patent in the process (by locating prior art). Unfortunately, it didn't do him any good: by the time he won, the legal fees had bankrupted his business and he was forced to close shop and cede the market anyway.[/indent]
</anecdote>
[/quote]Has this happened in the EU? I mean, by "enforced" I mean that I'm not sure they have any legal standing whatsoever (and filing is presumably in case this changes later on). I may be wrong, but would be curious to see details on the law change.

Of course anyone can sue you for any reason they like and that might cause you problems even if it's completely bogus. But that doesn't mean you should write off Europe as a market as you originally said. I mean, why just Europe? You could be sued in other parts of the world. Why just patents? Someone could sue you for any reason, but that's not a reason to not engage in business.

(Although yes, I take the point that if the EU allows things like the Runescape trial to happen, where as other parts of the world don't, then it's still a pretty bad state of affairs.)
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='mdwh' timestamp='1329237752' post='4913013']
But that doesn't mean you should write off Europe as a market as you originally said.[/quote]
I never said that.

SimonForsman suggested that you can avoid all regions with dubious patent laws. It's simply not feasible - cutting out the States already loses a good 50% of one's potential market, and it's far from the only country to have dubious legal systems with regard to patents...
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0