If they were the first ones smart enough to patent the concept..then they will likely be awarded something. I think its bullsh!t!....kind of like Fox ...Warner and the "Watchmen" movie. Fox sat on the rights for 20 years...putting forth no real effort to make the movie...Warner Brothers...albeit idiotically...overlooked and (I guess) assumed the rights had lapsed. Fox waits for WB to put all the cash in...finish the shooting..then files suit and wins a fabulous(undisclosed) cash prize. What is sad is ..I think Warner only made up its investment...but I'm sure DvD sales will be crazy...as the movie rocks(if you don't mind the deviation at the end..compared to the comic book). This seems to be a similar situation...although I am not aware of the intrinsic differences between the mediums involved where copyright/patent laws are concerned.
EDIT: I apologize if anyone already touched on this comparison...I haven't read every reply on this thread.
The factthatthey waited till now to sue could be what gets NC Soft off the hook. Part of the law states that you can't just wait until they start making money off your patent to sue. So unless they can prove they havn't had internet access since Everquest was launched 10 years ago I think that loop hole will get the MMO companies out of trouble. Probably not the proper reason for squashing the idiots but the easiest legal fallback position.
The lesser of two evils is still evil.
There is nothing more dangerous than a true believer.
This will be a cute excercise. People underestimate Ncsoft so much. It's a global, multi-national, multi-billion dollar corporation. I garauntee you that all the other mega game corporations are preparing cases of their own to crush these faggots before they gain any steam. These guys are hitting a hornets nest....only instead of hornets it's a bunch of cyborg-ninja-pirates. Us gamers won't stand for little fuckers like this bringing down our games. Whether they be the FPS with online capabilities to the hardcore RPG's. Of course that's assuming they even get that far. All NCsoft does is make MMO's of every shape and size. So it's a pretty safe guess that they have some of the best lawyers around that specialize in that field. Bottom line here is that you can't patent a broad idea like this. And that's exactly what these guys think they've done. This is like getting a patent on air. The vague nature of these patents could even extend to such 'virtual worlds' as chat rooms or myspace or facebook. It's completely insane that these patents even went through in the first place.
Firstly, they're not "bringing down our games". Overreact much?
Secondly, if they truly have the patent and NCsoft infringed it, no lawyer of any stature or price is going to make NCsoft a winner.
If they don't have the patent, NCsoft will win with even the feeblest lawyer.
Lastly, perhaps instead of blaming the "little fuckers", you should instead blame big corporations that don't do basic research?
The factthatthey waited till now to sue could be what gets NC Soft off the hook. Part of the law states that you can't just wait until they start making money off your patent to sue. So unless they can prove they havn't had internet access since Everquest was launched 10 years ago I think that loop hole will get the MMO companies out of trouble. Probably not the proper reason for squashing the idiots but the easiest legal fallback position.
Yeah....try looking at the post above you regarding The Watchmen, then rethink your suppositions.
Well if you look at the information on the Patent Arcade site (Link Here) it states that the patent has priority back to Nov 1996 (not sure how they get that date though). A lot of people seem to be focusing on disputing whether the patent is valid. That's not what this is about since the patent has already been passed. It's about whether or not NCSoft has violated that patent.
I can honestly say that you apparantly don't understand something about patent law. The Patent Trolls archived blog in the following link is actually about this case...
No where did I say the patent couldn't be overturned, but that's a separate case from this one against NCSoft and one that every MMORPG maker in the U.S. needs to be pursuing now rather than wait to see how Worlds.com does against NCSoft. You'll notice in the post you linked that reversing the Patent was a separate (and much later) process than the original case. Notice the sentence where it says: "The lawsuit was dead, but the patent reexamination was still underway."
Also, the gentleman won his case because he had proof that he used the concept prior to when the patent had priority, which in this particular case is Nov of 1996 (again I'm not sure how Patent Arcade got that date). Was NCSoft making MMORPG's prior to that date? Not that I found. Meridian 59 was out before then (and that to me is the key to overturning the patent), but does that help NCSoft with this lawsuit?
Sometimes I honestly wonder... I guess its because you have to be curious enough to explore the site.. and see who Randy Farmer was and is... and what he created and what the people he worked with created. So I apologize it wasn't clear I guess.
Also the above case wasn't won because he proved "prior art". It was because the company tried to expand the scope of their patent beyond that which was granted. Altho its not really the point or why I linked to the site I did.
The reason I linked to Randy Farmers site was because...
Randy Farmer and Chip Morningstar created most of the systems Worlds.com claim to have created.
If you actually read what Randy Farmer has to say you would see that most people didn't try to patent these things back then as they didn't think they could.
The link I included was not a link about how Worlds.com would lose. That paticular link is about what happens when you sue someone with a "bad patent". Altho I could argue that the very last paragraph IS about how Worlds.com will lose. In fact I'll edit it in as a quote at the bottom.
However, the site I linked to is involved.... because Randy Farmer... was the co-creator of Habitat...
Habitat having been the absolute first "graphical virtual world". MUDs pre-date Habitat... but when you look at Worlds.com patent they talk about Avatars etc.... (not text representation...)
I beta tested Habitat on Quantum Link which is why I knew about it.... And this comes back to why I talk about Randy Farmer... Chip Morningstar.... "prior art" and... stealing other peoples work (that wasn't patented) and then putting your own patent on it.
Someone is this thread claimed Worlds.com bought these patents... they may have bought the ones they filed the lawsuit with... They didn't buy the "prior art" becuase...
1) There was no Patent
2) Fujitsu owns Habitat and what it eventually turned into.... (Fujitsu eventually bought the full rights to it from Lucas... yes oddly enough Habitat was a Lucas Arts project back in the mid 1980's).
Maybe this helps make it more clear.. or will inspire people to search the net and see the actual issue with Worlds.com claiming they own this tech.
Read their patent... see what existed LONG before their company... notice no one from their company was ever on any of these projects...
Notice who won awards etc for inventing this tech.... you can read and educate yourself... its what helps bring light under the bridge (where the trolls live..)
So again it doesn't matter if NCSoft was making MMO's before 1996. The point is that Randy Farmer/Chip Morningstar (and others) created the tech that Worlds.com claims to have created (thus having a patent) OVER 10 years previous to the Worlds.com patent. So unless there was some massive flux of the timestream its impossible for Worlds.com to have any legit claim to this patent.
You cannot patent "prior art"... (well at least "prior art" you don't own or have any right to)
They didn't buy this patent from Lucas Arts (the owner of habitat) etc because there was NO patent to buy. They didn't buy Habitat (and thus turn around and patent its tech) because Habitat belongs to Fujitsu now...
Does that help?
They in my opinion took things they knew existed.. and thought would evolve into a market. Saw that there was no patent on any of it.. so decided to patent it as if they invented it. Then years later have decided to try and start a "cash farm" based on it. The reason Randy Farmer is so important in this case... Is as he says if you read more of his site... He kept every piece of documentation which is how you prove "prior art". Which brings you back to the "bad patent" thing which is why I used the link I did... The inference by Farmer is that Fujitsu tried to patent these things.. but would have required Randy Farmer and Chip Morningstar to sign off on them as they had "prior art". You'll notice in the quote I provide below they refused to sign off on these patents... Thus there are NO patents. If Fujitsu the owner of Habitat could not patent these things due to Farmer/Morningstar refusing to sign off on their prior art... Then how did Worlds.com get a patent for the exact same tech? 1985... 1986.. somewhat pre-date 1996.... and some of the tech "prior art" is probably older than that.
(edited repeatedly to try and make the point clear).
*note*
In fact I'll specificly quote in here the paragraph you seemed to have missed:
"Disclosure
I do not categorically object to patents. I have several granted patents and about the same number pending approval - filing defensive patents is unfortunately required by the current business environment . There are two Fujitsu patents that are in my name that Chip and I refused to sign because of prior art, and I have copies the legal paper trail to prove it - so if Fujitsu shows up at your door claiming to have the patent on the virtual world, you know where to find us."
This statement is because... Fujitsu (as I mentioned) now owns habitat. And the reference to "claiming to have a patent on the virtual world" should be pretty clear as its in a blog called "patent trolls piss me off" with a direct link the the lawsuit against NCSoft...
This is a case where you can scroll to the bottom of the page read what he says... then get curious and figure out what he's talking about... what he means by "prior art" and how could Fujitsu possibly have a patent on the virtual world if Worlds.com says they do....
This is why I hope NCSoft is smart enough to fight this... have Randy and Chip testify and get Worlds.com "bad patent" gutted...
*edited again*
Here is a link for the curious about Habitat... (from a presentation given in 1990)
This thing was in beta around 1986 on Quantum LInk so yes its fugly as heck. QLink was a Commodore only online service (random crap fact.. it later became America Online *.* ahem).
This was a graphical virtual world (even if it was ugly). You started with an apartment... there were many other players and environments to go through. I don't really remember much about it this many years later.. but it was definitely one of the things which was a starting point for the virtual worlds of today.. a lot of the server work etc came from here. This thing also fit on one 5.25 floppy which when you think about it ... is quite amazing. A formatted 5.25 for the C64 didn't have a ton of storage space etc etc etc
*final edit*
This is a link to the actual quoted Worlds.com patent filing:
You can use the patent number if you want to see the actual text on the US Patent Site tho the text IS from the Patent Office website.
Now if you can honestly look at the presentation given in 1990.. about the lessons learned from Habitat in the 1980's... and tell me that the Worlds.com patent isn't the same friggin thing... then I'm willing to listen.
They use a very wordy method of talking about "front end" ... "back end" ... media on client machines.. and only representing local avatars due to limitations... which is pretty much exactly what the people who created Habitat talk about having to deal with...
Or I guess I'm missing something...
Oh and if you are VERY curious this is what Habitat eventually turned into...
Gives a bit more history and its still running ... (yes in 2009).
The wiki link doesn't work becuase this site always breaks links formatted certain ways... If you google "dreamscape chat wiki" you'll get the extra history about it. When a url ends with something like (chat) it cuts the ) off and sends you to some wiki page that has nothing to do with the link...
Reading again it seems that one poster thinks Worlds.com "bought those two patents".. well I wonder if this person is referring to the ones Fujitsu owned that Farmer/Morningstar never signed off on.. due to "prior art". As I'm confused to what exactly that poster is talking about...
Wow so between Habitat and Neverwinter nights, you mean we owe the whole mmorpg revolution to America Online? If anyone is kicking themselves over a Patent, it should be Steve Chase.
"It is better to die on one's feet than to live on one's knees,"
Wow so between Habitat and Neverwinter nights, you mean we owe the whole mmorpg revolution to America Online? If anyone is kicking themselves over a Patent, it should be Steve Chase.
He's still kicking himself for buying Netscape and then letting it burn. Followed by buying Time Warner and then watching as the AOL moniker was removed from "AOL TIME WARNER" and he found himself removed from the company.
Unix Suing the Creators of Linux for use of the Unix Kernel
That happened several years ago, using the exact same tacticts being used by Worlds. The company was actually doing quite well, with a fair number of the buisnesses they had filed lawsuits against agreeing to pay rather than fight them in court.
Then Sun Microsystems showed up in court with rights to the key patents and announced they were in favor of the current status quo.
Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do. Benjamin Franklin
Until an hour ago, I knew nothing of this, but have read most of this and the Word Balloon Patent.
I guess the case is:
1) What did Worlds.com have to allow this patent to not be screwed up, shoved down their trollish throats and set alight in the first place? These supposed purchased patents/works.....are they definitely true or not and to what extent does it allow them to patent it? Those ideas were even further predated, weren't they?
2) This company didnt even exist when such environments existed and were being developed by, i dunno, several companies? If they have this patent, cant *any* company using the idea predating 1994 sue them for....something?
I dunno, it might be the time slowing my mind, but i think getting the idea patented was crafty, but they shouldve done it 15 years quicker...
I guess the backdating to before 2000 in the lawsuit was because the company started then, or they first developed that kinda software....which is balls as you can't start using an idea and say "I'm using this so you, you and you (who used it first) can't and that's that or pay me a kajillion dollars lololol"
Id like to meet who passed this patent...
Hope NC shows them the real meaning of grind... and get that patent put where it belongs...
Comments
If they were the first ones smart enough to patent the concept..then they will likely be awarded something. I think its bullsh!t!....kind of like Fox ...Warner and the "Watchmen" movie. Fox sat on the rights for 20 years...putting forth no real effort to make the movie...Warner Brothers...albeit idiotically...overlooked and (I guess) assumed the rights had lapsed. Fox waits for WB to put all the cash in...finish the shooting..then files suit and wins a fabulous(undisclosed) cash prize. What is sad is ..I think Warner only made up its investment...but I'm sure DvD sales will be crazy...as the movie rocks(if you don't mind the deviation at the end..compared to the comic book). This seems to be a similar situation...although I am not aware of the intrinsic differences between the mediums involved where copyright/patent laws are concerned.
EDIT: I apologize if anyone already touched on this comparison...I haven't read every reply on this thread.
The factthatthey waited till now to sue could be what gets NC Soft off the hook. Part of the law states that you can't just wait until they start making money off your patent to sue. So unless they can prove they havn't had internet access since Everquest was launched 10 years ago I think that loop hole will get the MMO companies out of trouble. Probably not the proper reason for squashing the idiots but the easiest legal fallback position.
The lesser of two evils is still evil.
There is nothing more dangerous than a true believer.
WORLDS.COM MUST DIE! DIE! DIE! DIE! And DIE horribly! So, er, there!
Firstly, they're not "bringing down our games". Overreact much?
Secondly, if they truly have the patent and NCsoft infringed it, no lawyer of any stature or price is going to make NCsoft a winner.
If they don't have the patent, NCsoft will win with even the feeblest lawyer.
Lastly, perhaps instead of blaming the "little fuckers", you should instead blame big corporations that don't do basic research?
Yeah....try looking at the post above you regarding The Watchmen, then rethink your suppositions.
I can honestly say that you apparantly don't understand something about patent law. The Patent Trolls archived blog in the following link is actually about this case...
http://thefarmers.org/Habitat/2008/12/
....
No where did I say the patent couldn't be overturned, but that's a separate case from this one against NCSoft and one that every MMORPG maker in the U.S. needs to be pursuing now rather than wait to see how Worlds.com does against NCSoft. You'll notice in the post you linked that reversing the Patent was a separate (and much later) process than the original case. Notice the sentence where it says: "The lawsuit was dead, but the patent reexamination was still underway."
Also, the gentleman won his case because he had proof that he used the concept prior to when the patent had priority, which in this particular case is Nov of 1996 (again I'm not sure how Patent Arcade got that date). Was NCSoft making MMORPG's prior to that date? Not that I found. Meridian 59 was out before then (and that to me is the key to overturning the patent), but does that help NCSoft with this lawsuit?
Sometimes I honestly wonder... I guess its because you have to be curious enough to explore the site.. and see who Randy Farmer was and is... and what he created and what the people he worked with created. So I apologize it wasn't clear I guess.
Also the above case wasn't won because he proved "prior art". It was because the company tried to expand the scope of their patent beyond that which was granted. Altho its not really the point or why I linked to the site I did.
The reason I linked to Randy Farmers site was because...
Randy Farmer and Chip Morningstar created most of the systems Worlds.com claim to have created.
If you actually read what Randy Farmer has to say you would see that most people didn't try to patent these things back then as they didn't think they could.
The link I included was not a link about how Worlds.com would lose. That paticular link is about what happens when you sue someone with a "bad patent". Altho I could argue that the very last paragraph IS about how Worlds.com will lose. In fact I'll edit it in as a quote at the bottom.
However, the site I linked to is involved.... because Randy Farmer... was the co-creator of Habitat...
Habitat having been the absolute first "graphical virtual world". MUDs pre-date Habitat... but when you look at Worlds.com patent they talk about Avatars etc.... (not text representation...)
I beta tested Habitat on Quantum Link which is why I knew about it.... And this comes back to why I talk about Randy Farmer... Chip Morningstar.... "prior art" and... stealing other peoples work (that wasn't patented) and then putting your own patent on it.
Someone is this thread claimed Worlds.com bought these patents... they may have bought the ones they filed the lawsuit with... They didn't buy the "prior art" becuase...
1) There was no Patent
2) Fujitsu owns Habitat and what it eventually turned into.... (Fujitsu eventually bought the full rights to it from Lucas... yes oddly enough Habitat was a Lucas Arts project back in the mid 1980's).
Maybe this helps make it more clear.. or will inspire people to search the net and see the actual issue with Worlds.com claiming they own this tech.
Read their patent... see what existed LONG before their company... notice no one from their company was ever on any of these projects...
Notice who won awards etc for inventing this tech.... you can read and educate yourself... its what helps bring light under the bridge (where the trolls live..)
So again it doesn't matter if NCSoft was making MMO's before 1996. The point is that Randy Farmer/Chip Morningstar (and others) created the tech that Worlds.com claims to have created (thus having a patent) OVER 10 years previous to the Worlds.com patent. So unless there was some massive flux of the timestream its impossible for Worlds.com to have any legit claim to this patent.
You cannot patent "prior art"... (well at least "prior art" you don't own or have any right to)
They didn't buy this patent from Lucas Arts (the owner of habitat) etc because there was NO patent to buy. They didn't buy Habitat (and thus turn around and patent its tech) because Habitat belongs to Fujitsu now...
Does that help?
They in my opinion took things they knew existed.. and thought would evolve into a market. Saw that there was no patent on any of it.. so decided to patent it as if they invented it. Then years later have decided to try and start a "cash farm" based on it. The reason Randy Farmer is so important in this case... Is as he says if you read more of his site... He kept every piece of documentation which is how you prove "prior art". Which brings you back to the "bad patent" thing which is why I used the link I did... The inference by Farmer is that Fujitsu tried to patent these things.. but would have required Randy Farmer and Chip Morningstar to sign off on them as they had "prior art". You'll notice in the quote I provide below they refused to sign off on these patents... Thus there are NO patents. If Fujitsu the owner of Habitat could not patent these things due to Farmer/Morningstar refusing to sign off on their prior art... Then how did Worlds.com get a patent for the exact same tech? 1985... 1986.. somewhat pre-date 1996.... and some of the tech "prior art" is probably older than that.
(edited repeatedly to try and make the point clear).
*note*
In fact I'll specificly quote in here the paragraph you seemed to have missed:
"Disclosure
I do not categorically object to patents. I have several granted patents and about the same number pending approval - filing defensive patents is unfortunately required by the current business environment . There are two Fujitsu patents that are in my name that Chip and I refused to sign because of prior art, and I have copies the legal paper trail to prove it - so if Fujitsu shows up at your door claiming to have the patent on the virtual world, you know where to find us."
This statement is because... Fujitsu (as I mentioned) now owns habitat. And the reference to "claiming to have a patent on the virtual world" should be pretty clear as its in a blog called "patent trolls piss me off" with a direct link the the lawsuit against NCSoft...
This is a case where you can scroll to the bottom of the page read what he says... then get curious and figure out what he's talking about... what he means by "prior art" and how could Fujitsu possibly have a patent on the virtual world if Worlds.com says they do....
This is why I hope NCSoft is smart enough to fight this... have Randy and Chip testify and get Worlds.com "bad patent" gutted...
*edited again*
Here is a link for the curious about Habitat... (from a presentation given in 1990)
http://www.fudco.com/chip/lessons.html
This thing was in beta around 1986 on Quantum LInk so yes its fugly as heck. QLink was a Commodore only online service (random crap fact.. it later became America Online *.* ahem).
This was a graphical virtual world (even if it was ugly). You started with an apartment... there were many other players and environments to go through. I don't really remember much about it this many years later.. but it was definitely one of the things which was a starting point for the virtual worlds of today.. a lot of the server work etc came from here. This thing also fit on one 5.25 floppy which when you think about it ... is quite amazing. A formatted 5.25 for the C64 didn't have a ton of storage space etc etc etc
*final edit*
This is a link to the actual quoted Worlds.com patent filing:
http://www.google.com/patents?id=wv5-AAAAEBAJ&dq=7,181,690
You can use the patent number if you want to see the actual text on the US Patent Site tho the text IS from the Patent Office website.
Now if you can honestly look at the presentation given in 1990.. about the lessons learned from Habitat in the 1980's... and tell me that the Worlds.com patent isn't the same friggin thing... then I'm willing to listen.
They use a very wordy method of talking about "front end" ... "back end" ... media on client machines.. and only representing local avatars due to limitations... which is pretty much exactly what the people who created Habitat talk about having to deal with...
Or I guess I'm missing something...
Oh and if you are VERY curious this is what Habitat eventually turned into...
http://www.vzones.com/
Gives a bit more history and its still running ... (yes in 2009).
The wiki link doesn't work becuase this site always breaks links formatted certain ways... If you google "dreamscape chat wiki" you'll get the extra history about it. When a url ends with something like (chat) it cuts the ) off and sends you to some wiki page that has nothing to do with the link...
Reading again it seems that one poster thinks Worlds.com "bought those two patents".. well I wonder if this person is referring to the ones Fujitsu owned that Farmer/Morningstar never signed off on.. due to "prior art". As I'm confused to what exactly that poster is talking about...
Wow so between Habitat and Neverwinter nights, you mean we owe the whole mmorpg revolution to America Online? If anyone is kicking themselves over a Patent, it should be Steve Chase.
"It is better to die on one's feet than to live on one's knees,"
He's still kicking himself for buying Netscape and then letting it burn. Followed by buying Time Warner and then watching as the AOL moniker was removed from "AOL TIME WARNER" and he found himself removed from the company.
Hmm - what's this about the first "graphical virtual world" dating from the mid 90's?
Would your honour be interested in a game of Nethack? Graphics are primitive (ascii...) but it 's a multi-player game dating from 1987.
D&D Home Page - What Class Are You? - Build A Character - D&D Compendium
That happened several years ago, using the exact same tacticts being used by Worlds. The company was actually doing quite well, with a fair number of the buisnesses they had filed lawsuits against agreeing to pay rather than fight them in court.
Then Sun Microsystems showed up in court with rights to the key patents and announced they were in favor of the current status quo.
Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do.
Benjamin Franklin
Software patents, biggest waste of time ever. At least the lawyers will be happy when they get a load of cash, whether they lose or win. Laughable.
Until an hour ago, I knew nothing of this, but have read most of this and the Word Balloon Patent.
I guess the case is:
1) What did Worlds.com have to allow this patent to not be screwed up, shoved down their trollish throats and set alight in the first place? These supposed purchased patents/works.....are they definitely true or not and to what extent does it allow them to patent it? Those ideas were even further predated, weren't they?
2) This company didnt even exist when such environments existed and were being developed by, i dunno, several companies? If they have this patent, cant *any* company using the idea predating 1994 sue them for....something?
I dunno, it might be the time slowing my mind, but i think getting the idea patented was crafty, but they shouldve done it 15 years quicker...
I guess the backdating to before 2000 in the lawsuit was because the company started then, or they first developed that kinda software....which is balls as you can't start using an idea and say "I'm using this so you, you and you (who used it first) can't and that's that or pay me a kajillion dollars lololol"
Id like to meet who passed this patent...
Hope NC shows them the real meaning of grind... and get that patent put where it belongs...