Every game maker who has used 3D is being Sued.

[Raedon]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/11/03/game_cos_3d_lawsuit/

So.. I guess they waited until it was a Billion $$$ industry?

[EnemyZero]

what a joke :angry:

[Cmosfm]

:roll:

I think i'm gonna act on my "Breathing" patent I filed for in the 1800's.

[Daria]

And 3D movies magically don't apply? o.O

[tholly]

now thats one of the dumbest lawsuits i have ever heard of

if they win i will be extremely saddened by our judicial system

[SoulBlazer]

Ah, don't worry, it will get tossed.

Either that or the companies will just agree to pay a licence fee.

On a related topic -- do companies still need to pay a licence fee to Magnavox for their patent on video game systems or is that finished with?

[Habeeb Hamusta]

Haha. You can file a lawsuit for anything nowadays. I think it would be hillarious if it actually worked and they got to sue all of those companies. Doubt it will though, too bad.

[Gapporin]

On a related topic -- do companies still need to pay a licence fee to Magnavox for their patent on video game systems or is that finished with?

If that's the case, then Ralph Baer will become the next Bill Gates.

[SegaAges]

sweet, does this mean that nobody has a patent on walking. i will make a deal with the breathing patent guy. i will allow you to walk under my patent, as long as i can breath. everybody else, no more walking. for every step you take, you owe me money.

[racecar]

now thats one of the dumbest lawsuits i have ever heard of

if they win i will be extremely saddened by our judicial system
me too !!

[rbudrick]

If that's the case, then Ralph Baer will become the next Bill Gates.

No he wouldn't. Generally, when inventors work for a compnay, they get paid a salary. Anything they invent belongs to the company, not the inventor. I guess some inventors may get bonuses for successful items based on whatever agreements with their employer, but not always the case.

-Rob

[MegaDrive20XX]

Ok that's more stupid then trying to get a patent on the word "french fries" ok? It ain't going to happen

[Iron Draggon]

Very interesting how Sony, Nintendo, & Microsoft apparently weren't named in the lawsuit. They're clearly only going after the companies that aren't very likely to slaughter them in the courts. It's just an attempt to blackmail all the blackmailers for a change, so in a way I kinda hope they win, but they won't.

[Gamemaster_ca_2003]

Hum It seems that they are not going after Sony, Nintendo or Microsoft wonder why.

[tholly]

Ok that's more stupid then trying to get a patent on the word "french fries" ok? It ain't going to happen


good point....but i would have to assume that at the time this was set up back in the '80s 2D / 3D wasn't a very big thing and there may have been some relevance in getting a patient....now it is just an everyday very common term, so i dont know how effective this law suit will be

[NintendoMan]

what a joke :angry:
Yeah, what a fucking joke!

[Querjek]

:roll:

I think i'm gonna act on my "Breathing" patent I filed for in the 1800's.
Pffft, that's nothing compared to my patent on life :)

[Raven1280]

im going to get a patent on the fork.

[GaijinPunch]

You guys are all screwed, as I invented (and patented) the question mark!
This is a joke, considering 3D images were displayed on a 2D surface (a screen) long before 1987 -- they can't patent it.

[Ed Oscuro]

GG @ Prior Art

[Ed Oscuro]

What I thought...just talked with a onetime lawyer who'd worked at the U.S. Patent & Trademark office, he said this:

"If they filed that patent in 1987, that means it's governed by the old rules, and will expire this year."

Seems they've waited as long as they could to get some money out of this.

Thank goodness Atari never did anything of the sort with their (now surely expired) sidescrolling routines patent. LOL

[maxlords]

They'll lose.

[charitycasegreg]

so they just waited until the latest they could so they could tons more 3d companies tehn they could have 5 years ago. If this actually works...which I highly doubt it will...that is really smart... :/

[goatdan]

Chances are very good that they'll lose. Here's a few reasons why:

1) To infringe on a patent, the person doing the infringing has to basically copy something exactly as it is. Thus, if this company published an engine and everyone copied it code line per code line, it would be infringement. Creating their own thing that does the same sort of thing in a slightly different way would not be an infringement -- thus, both Ford and General Motors can make two (or more) different vehicles that feature four wheels. Otherwise, we're all stuck in Model T's.

2) They took way too long to file their complaint. Yes, it might be because all these companies now used it, but if they actually felt that their patent was being infringed on, they should've put an end to it years and years ago. Besides that, I can guarantee that the 3D landscapes of a title like Halo 2 are no where near what this company thought they would be in '87.

3) You can't just sue for being a similar product. I think that it was Capcom that sued over another game that was similar to Street Fighter. Sega sued over Simpsons Road Rage being too similar to Crazy Taxi and demand that the game stop being sold. I can still get it new everywhere.

I'm always impressed with how much stupid crap the US legal system pushes through, so I wouldn't be totally surprised to see a win for the 3D company... but it sure doesn't look good from where I sit.

[kainemaxwell]

Thanks, needed a good laugh!

[Jasoco]

best. Article. Ever. I love the use of DOOM for the example. Like a bunch of Cacodemons, say..

Superb article.

Oh, by the way, I patented the usage of atoms to build physical objects. So y'all owe me buttloads of money.

[drdrew1469]

My 'Blinking' patent was filed ages ago and I haven't seen one cent. My eyes are open, and closed, and open to suggestions for filing a claim [sorry for the shitty pun, i'm going to punish myself now] :roll:

[mezrabad]

When did Elite first come out? That was the first thing I thought of as pre-existing art.

I wonder if they patented a specific projection method or a sorting algorythm or something like that?

Don't be surprised if someone somewhere down the road soon starts to try to get licensing fees for texture mapping.

Lame.

[YoshiM]

Hum It seems that they are not going after Sony, Nintendo or Microsoft wonder why.

Simple reason: go against the smaller fish to build up a "win" portfolio and show that it's "really a big deal". Then, with some wins/settlements under their belts they can then rattle their swords at the big boys. To probably save face and not be dragged through court (which may be more expensive as these lawyers will have a bit more clout) they'd just pay out the license and be done with it.

[SegaAges]

Chances are very good that they'll lose. Here's a few reasons why:

1) To infringe on a patent, the person doing the infringing has to basically copy something exactly as it is. Thus, if this company published an engine and everyone copied it code line per code line, it would be infringement. Creating their own thing that does the same sort of thing in a slightly different way would not be an infringement -- thus, both Ford and General Motors can make two (or more) different vehicles that feature four wheels. Otherwise, we're all stuck in Model T's.

2) They took way too long to file their complaint. Yes, it might be because all these companies now used it, but if they actually felt that their patent was being infringed on, they should've put an end to it years and years ago. Besides that, I can guarantee that the 3D landscapes of a title like Halo 2 are no where near what this company thought they would be in '87.

3) You can't just sue for being a similar product. I think that it was Capcom that sued over another game that was similar to Street Fighter. Sega sued over Simpsons Road Rage being too similar to Crazy Taxi and demand that the game stop being sold. I can still get it new everywhere.

I'm always impressed with how much stupid crap the US legal system pushes through, so I wouldn't be totally surprised to see a win for the 3D company... but it sure doesn't look good from where I sit.

goatdan: sega sued over simpsons road rage for it not being similar, but they had (i think it was a patent) over taxi video games. they tried to get crazy and basically say that they were the only company allowed to make taxi-type games. well they lost the suit, but that is why.

also, we are going to have to work with our patents. anybody who lets me freely use their patent, i will "allow" them to use mine. i guess if i have to, i can stop breathing and then break myself down to a cellular level

[Oobgarm]

Thanks, needed a good laugh!

metoo,,, !!

[morphx]

You guys are all screwed, as I invented (and patented) the question mark!
This is a joke, considering 3D images were displayed on a 2D surface (a screen) long before 1987 -- they can't patent it.

Yep can't sue for a technology that was already in widespread use/development at the time of patent. Thanks for playing, please try again.

[goatdan]

goatdan: sega sued over simpsons road rage for it not being similar, but they had (i think it was a patent) over taxi video games. they tried to get crazy and basically say that they were the only company allowed to make taxi-type games. well they lost the suit, but that is why.

I think you're agreeing with me here...

Just because Sega had a patent on the development of Crazy Taxi doesn't mean they can sue over a similar game.

Just becuase someone patented displaying 3D in some fashion on a monitor doesn't mean that you can sue over a different 3D game.

[slip81]

sweet, does this mean that nobody has a patent on walking. i will make a deal with the breathing patent guy. i will allow you to walk under my patent, as long as i can breath. everybody else, no more walking. for every step you take, you owe me money.

Well you guys are both screwed because it just so happens that I filed a living patent a few million years ago LOL