Obsidian got filed for patent infringement

[C2B]

http://de.scribd.com...n-Entertainment

 

Apparently it's about a method to automatically lipsync animated charachters

Edited December 9, 2012 by C2B

[Apatia]

Patent troll?

[Gorth]

Since they are trying Treyarch, Insomniac Games, Namco, Konami, Shiny, Sega, Naughty Dog, Sony, Capcom, Square Enix, Thq, Rockstar, 2K Games, Lucasarts Neversoft, Activision/Blizzard and a bunch of others, I would say it smells of desperation and somebody is trying to wring money out game companies. Sadly, the "exhibits", were missing, so no way to see what they think everybody else is doing that is too similar. Particularly hilarious was the bit about Obsidian keep selling the allegedly infringing games.

 

Edit: Wanna bet Lucasarts and Blizzards lawyers are going to wipe the floor with them?

[Humanoid]

I was hoping it was for "method to exercise a cat".

[WorstUsernameEver]

Since they are trying Treyarch, Insomniac Games, Namco, Konami, Shiny, Sega, Naughty Dog, Sony, Capcom, Square Enix, Thq, Rockstar, 2K Games, Lucasarts Neversoft, Activision/Blizzard and a bunch of others, I would say it smells of desperation and somebody is trying to wring money out game companies.

 

Pretty much this.

[Deadly_Nightshade]

[Dragoonlordz]

Seems to me to be someone trying their luck attempting to sue many developers as can hoping one will win.

 

The fact asked and ticked box for requiring a jury smells of desperation.

 

I hope all he filed it against will take him to the cleaners. Take his home, his car and his business. Leave him a cardboard box and a bicycle.

Edited December 10, 2012 by Dragoonlordz

[greylord]

So there's a thread about piracy. IF this was something the person patented and actually has algorithms, lines of code, and other things and can be shown to be specific...would you still hope they get taken to the cleaners?

 

If they actually have a patent and their invention of that sort is being used, I don't think Obsidian is necessarily at fault, I think one group started using it, and then others, it spread as a common way to do something, and when that happened everyone was using it, inclusive of Obsidian.

 

Bringing this back to my first sentence...some have expressed some rather strict interpretations of piracy there...enough that it would condemn not just the original takers of the method, but everyone who has used that method.

 

In light of what people have said in that thread, or what each poster has said...are people being hypocritical here or not?

 

PS: I support Obsidian, hope that they don't lose anything on this lawsuit, or that it's frivolous, but if it does have bearing, and this really is a result of someone taking the method originally created by someone else...I think that could be something reflected upon by others.

 

Personally I think if Blue is charging that many, the judge should just lump it all together into a solitary case, perhaps class action or general pursuit so if there is a conviction maybe there is a lead company (original company that utilized the process and let it spread into commonality for the industry) that pays the bulk with the rest being spread out to ease the load on everyone else.

Edited December 14, 2012 by greylord

[Gorth]

If they actually have a patent and their invention of that sort is being used, I don't think Obsidian is necessarily at fault, I think one group started using it, and then others, it spread as a common way to do something, and when that happened everyone was using it, inclusive of Obsidian.

...

In light of what people have said in that thread, or what each poster has said...are people being hypocritical here or not?

Not really. Ripping somebody off deliberately and knowingly for the purpose of greed and being fooled by companies or individuals into buying their services and products in good faith, likely paying good money in the process, isn't quite the same. If you can't see that, then nobody can help you.

 

Besides, there are companies who never invented a thing, but has turned it into an industry searching patent office records, trying to catch companies off-guard with "Gotcha's" because somebody may have patented something in the past, that is similar enough to a common practice. Strange the "inventors" only discovered more than a decade later that video games exists? If they had actually provided any proof or specifics, they may have been worth listening to, but when using the shotgun method against any and all video game companies listed in the yellow pages in the same week (and only US ones, they probably didn't have access to overseas phone books), it comes across as gold diggers, not trying to "protect their investment", but trying to extort money from an industry. Did anybody ever claim that abusing the patent system is better than piracy? Nope, just as pathetic.

[greylord]

If they actually have a patent and their invention of that sort is being used, I don't think Obsidian is necessarily at fault, I think one group started using it, and then others, it spread as a common way to do something, and when that happened everyone was using it, inclusive of Obsidian.

...

In light of what people have said in that thread, or what each poster has said...are people being hypocritical here or not?

Not really. Ripping somebody off deliberately and knowingly for the purpose of greed and being fooled by companies or individuals into buying their services and products in good faith, likely paying good money in the process, isn't quite the same. If you can't see that, then nobody can help you.

 

Besides, there are companies who never invented a thing, but has turned it into an industry searching patent office records, trying to catch companies off-guard with "Gotcha's" because somebody may have patented something in the past, that is similar enough to a common practice. Strange the "inventors" only discovered more than a decade later that video games exists? If they had actually provided any proof or specifics, they may have been worth listening to, but when using the shotgun method against any and all video game companies listed in the yellow pages in the same week (and only US ones, they probably didn't have access to overseas phone books), it comes across as gold diggers, not trying to "protect their investment", but trying to extort money from an industry. Did anybody ever claim that abusing the patent system is better than piracy? Nope, just as pathetic.

 

With patents it's not that clear cut many times. An accepted process may be patented, but many times the patent office takes time. You can notify people that this is your process, but it still gets out. In many cases patents won't be done until they are outdated in technology. This is why many electronics will list the patents on them, but will say...patents pending...

 

This is because ten years down the line when the patent is finally approved...it will already be outdated.

 

So what happens in instances is sometimes a particularly useful idea is used, even if someone has already filed for patent. They do this because the patent has't already been approved. Later, when it finally is, that's when lawsuits start. Sometimes a technology is so widespread by then it's impossible to reign the cat in.

 

Some ironic examples in this entire piracy thing would deal with movies and file sharing. Early on, companies went after filesharing on peer to peer networks. HOWEVER...they did not own the patents on the same peer to peer networks they were accusing of copyright sharing. They illegally used the technology to find the filesharing networks information, utilizng processes they did not own. They were successful in the prosecution...and were not sued back because the patents were not complete as of yet. HOWEVER...the patent infringment could actually be a stronger suite and cost them more then they made in the copyright cases when the patent was finally resolved. The solution, in order not to get sued to timbuktu and back...get one of their companies to buy out the company using the technology they used and in some ways...buy off the very people they had previously prosecuted.

 

Patents can take time...a LOT of time. Most of piracy talks about copyright issues because that's the quickest turn arounds and the fastest and noisiest industry on it. However, it's also the least money lost or made. Patent piracy is FAR more hard hitting. The Chinese have larger warchest in the patent front, and are the most ruthless in their piracy of it. That said, it's also pretty big industry wide.

 

The problem comes in when one or two companies steal ideas, creations, or technology that's already been submitted for patent. One devious usage is to take the tech (or in this case the binary tree of process) and give it a slight tweak to try to argue that it doesn't fall under the other company's patent. Other's then think it's common usage and free to use, even if it's not.

 

A copyright patent idea on this is on filesharing. Some person states they are Warner Bros. but are not, and they are distributing a Warner bros. film for free. Or you go to YouTube and see a movie there and watch it. You may assume it is legit...but in many cases it is not.

 

Patent infringment is even worse then that though. Normally it's for hard money, it's not simply using it for personal use for free. Companies use the patent on their own items and sell them for money...knowingly or not. This is actually a HOTTER topic in idustry than copyright piracy because with China it's been a bigger issue than anything else. That chinese TV you bought, made by a Chinese company, probably is using something already submitted for patent in Europe or the US...and being rogued and robbed already by the Chinese.

 

So, I'm not certain whether it's simply people don't understand just how bad patent infringment is and how it's piracy or they are just being hypocrits.

 

As for your example above...I already stated the equivalent in copyright piracy with someone claiming legit use and you simply accepting it, when in many instances it is not.

 

However, for your example Gorth...when Disney buys out Lucasfilm, does that mean downloading Star Wars from a Peer to peer site or elsewise, or watching it on youtube or some other site like that, is now less of a piracy action then it was prior to Disney buying Lucasfilm?

 

I have my own take on piracy and it's industry, but I think there will be many who stated some pretty strong opinions in the Piracy thread that will turn out to be hypocrites on an issue like this.

 

PS: And as I already stated, hopefully it turns out to be nothing...or someone just fishing for money. BUT, and as I stated before..if it REALLY IS a result of Piracy or infringment...I can understand the case and the situation. I also think Obsidian would never do somethng like it on purpose, and that it probably would end up as one or two leakers making it into an industry wide accepted practice.

[Gorth]

Just for good measure, Wiki's summary of patent trolls:

 

Patent Troll

 

"Purchases a patent, often from a bankrupt firm, and then sues another company by claiming that one of its products infringes on the purchased patent

Enforces patents against purported infringers without itself intending to manufacture the patented product or supply the patented service

Enforces patents but has no manufacturing or research base

Focuses its efforts solely on enforcing patent rights

Asserts patent infringement claims against non-copiers or against a large industry that is composed of non-copiers"

 

Basically gaming the system without contributing anything of value.

[Gorth]

So what happens in instances is sometimes a particularly useful idea is used, even if someone has already filed for patent. They do this because the patent has't already been approved. Later, when it finally is, that's when lawsuits start. Sometimes a technology is so widespread by then it's impossible to reign the cat in.

 

You can also contest a patent, if there is doubt about whether or not any invention actually took place, whether or not the patent filer is the one doing the invention and whether or not it was something too generic to actually patent. See debate about human DNA.

 

 

Some ironic examples in this entire piracy thing would deal with movies and file sharing. Early on, companies went after filesharing on peer to peer networks. HOWEVER...they did not own the patents on the same peer to peer networks they were accusing of copyright sharing.

 

Did you confuse yourself? You sure confused me. What does copyright have to do with patents (other than protect creators and inventors)?

 

Patents can take time...a LOT of time.

 

Typically 2-3 years (and we are talking 11-12 years after the fact here).

 

The problem comes in when one or two companies steal ideas, creations, or technology that's already been submitted for patent. One devious usage is to take the tech (or in this case the binary tree of process) and give it a slight tweak to try to argue that it doesn't fall under the other company's patent. Other's then think it's common usage and free to use, even if it's not.

 

In that case, the patent applicant can contact the users of the patent and point out that it has already been filed.

 

A copyright patent idea on this is on filesharing. Some person states they are Warner Bros. but are not, and they are distributing a Warner bros. film for free. Or you go to YouTube and see a movie there and watch it. You may assume it is legit...but in many cases it is not.

 

I have a nice bridge in Los Angeles I want to sell you

 

I think most pirates are low life's, but most of them aren't *that* stupid, even if they try hard to convince people of it sometimes.

 

Patent infringment is even worse then that though. Normally it's for hard money, it's not simply using it for personal use for free. Companies use the patent on their own items and sell them for money...knowingly or not. This is actually a HOTTER topic in idustry than copyright piracy because with China it's been a bigger issue than anything else. That chinese TV you bought, made by a Chinese company, probably is using something already submitted for patent in Europe or the US...and being rogued and robbed already by the Chinese.

 

Which is why you have courtrooms and it's up to lawyers to decide. If MCRo is a genuine company developing lip sync middleware that they sell to video game and animated movie studio's, they are entitled to their due for their money invested in research and development. If not, I hope their next job involves asking 'Want fries with that?'.

 

However, for your example Gorth...when Disney buys out Lucasfilm, does that mean downloading Star Wars from a Peer to peer site or elsewise, or watching it on youtube or some other site like that, is now less of a piracy action then it was prior to Disney buying Lucasfilm?

 

Point not found?

[greylord]

Napster is the prime example of two kinds of piracy. MPAA and RIAA did NOT hold patent rights for what they used to ferret out the filesharing...

 

Solution...

 

Though Napster was already dead in the water...get someone to buy Napster...hence preventing the inevitable lawsuit of their own piracy.

 

Copyright piracy was made the big cat...but the bigger one that could actually have bought everyone down on that one was the other piracy. These guys are smart though...it didn't make sense for anyone to actually buy Napster when they did as it was completely dead by that point and all the PtoP players moved to other things at that point (ebear, emule, etc). However, the bigger animal was lose and they did a smart side step.

 

On the disney idea...Your idea of

 

Not really. Ripping somebody off deliberately and knowingly for the purpose of greed and being fooled by companies or individuals into buying their services and products in good faith, likely paying good money in the process, isn't quite the same. If you can't see that, then nobody can help you.

 

is applicable to both processes. Piracy isn't knowingly stealing these days. Do a movie search on Youtube...you'll see what I mean. If you think all those are legal...you can buy your own bridge in the middle of the Sahara. There are many "legit" appearances in the copyright piracy...and can to many seem to be just as legal as any patent piracy.

 

The thing is, I'm not accusing Obsidian of anything (If you noticed), but I DO know that patent piracy is rampant. Patent infringement is rampant. It happens more often then copyright piracy.

 

Which is what makes this interesting. My point is if this guy/corporation has a legit point...WHY it is possible. It doesn't matter if you don't want it to be true or disagree, if it is a legit case of patent infringement or piracy, the question is how hypocritical are people going to be?

 

They get all righteous in the Piracy thread...but when faced with the fact that it could be patent piracy involving a large number of game companies...suddenly they all turn to hypocrits.

 

We don't know all the specifics of the case to tell the truth...and I've been more then open in hoping that it's just what you stated, someone fishing and it isn't going to do anything (as I pointed out above, you can read it as well).

 

HOWEVER...I also know how easy it is to have a patent and then have someone rogue it, use it, and then it spreads out as others use it. The others aren't using it to purposefully steal someone else's theory/invention/branching subroutne...BUT it happens. ALL THE TIME.

 

It's far more common than copyright piracy...the copyright piracy only gets the majority of attention because the MPAA and RIAA have your ear.

 

The Patent piracy actually is the one that is costing the US and the West FAR MORE money. Sure...it's not going to flash a Bioware game or Hollywood movie on your screen...but a simple thing such as a video idea pertinent to LCD copied by the Chinese, manufactured in their plants, and then sold for a fifth of what it costs in the West to make forces Western businesses into bankruptcy...OR going to China themselves to make the same item costing jobs. This in turn hurts the economies of the US and Europe. It hurts FAR more than any movie can even imagine making.

 

it's not just the Chinese, they just happen to benefit the most. Shoving your head in the sand and singing to oneself to ignore the problem doesn't cause it to go away however.

 

I'm not here to justify the lawsuit. When I looked at the papers it actually seemed like it could go either way...which means that the filers could be on shaky ground. This is sneaky business.

 

Imagine you made a wrench. it was a unique wrench that was adaptable. I sell your wrench in my store. Then I decide to kill your contract and you see I'm selling a wrench that does the same thing as yours. However, I modified it because I put a little hook on the handle...hence I say it's not patent infringment.

 

Would you think I stole your idea?

 

Or would you say as you have been saying now, it's all okay?

 

And then, after I did that you see it popping up in Walmart, Kmart, and everywhere else. They do it because I did it but did not have a patent (and never filed one either), so they think it's actually open source.

 

How do you feel then?

 

Is that piracy? Is that stealling?

 

And yes, it can be that simple...and yes...this is based off of a true story...

 

http://news.google.c...pg=7138,4472004

 

bought a socket wrench recently??

 

and others

 

http://abcnews.go.co...ory?id=17720122

 

http://www.nytimes.c...wanted=all&_r=0

 

http://www.tampabay....icle1260852.ece

 

And that's just wrenches.

 

I'm actually not as stringent into the piracy as many on that thread...but I'm not going to rule out that this could be a legit thing. If so, I hope the guy get's his money somehow.

 

If it's just someone fishing for money, well hopefully that turns up soon also.

 

I shared both those thoughts already...basically until I know more of the story though, I don't have the information to determine WHO is right and WHO is wrong on this yet.

 

To blindly assume that somone is innocent though...

 

What's more interesting is how some in that thread that were excessively extreme in their thoughts against piracy would excuse this sight unseen before knowing all the facts, regardless of whether there is innocence or not.

 

Which is why I feel if they started posting here could show the huge hypocrisy of some of those from that thread.

Edited December 15, 2012 by greylord

[Gorth]

What's more interesting is how some in that thread that were excessively extreme in their thoughts against piracy would excuse this sight unseen before knowing all the facts, regardless of whether there is innocence or not.

 

Why don't you drop the strawman? Nobody gives a damn about copyright in a patent thread.

 

Nobody said anything about violating patents being Ok

 

In fact:

 

Which is why you have courtrooms and it's up to lawyers to decide. If MCRo is a genuine company developing lip sync middleware that they sell to video game and animated movie studio's, they are entitled to their due for their money invested in research and development. If not, I hope their next job involves asking 'Want fries with that?'.

 

Somebody (me) said the suit looked suspicious because of the dates and companies involved (i.e. a company that for all intent and purposes don't exist and doesn't have a history, other than suddenly filing a few hundred infringement claims without anything specific.). If they had pointed out exactly where and how their patent had been infringed, I might have given them the benefit of the doubt. As it stands, it looks like a patent troll (see definition above).

 

If you want to discuss patents in general, why not create a thread in Way off Topic?

 

 

What's more interesting is how some in that thread that were excessively extreme in their thoughts against piracy would excuse this sight unseen before knowing all the facts, regardless of whether there is innocence or not.

 

Which is why I feel if they started posting here could show the huge hypocrisy of some of those from that thread.

 

The only hypocrisy displayed are when morons go to great length trying to justify piracy.

[Dragoonlordz]

Sorry but McRo is clearly fishing here. A chancer. Few things point to this for me. Firstly he has filed individual lawsuits against all major publishers and a vast amount of developers, he has apparently asked for jury trials in each case and funny how this patent has existed for over a decade and yet only now is getting around to trying to stop people doing what he claims they are doing (without even giving examples of where or how doing it). I stinks of someone trying to scam the system. He deserves nothing if that is the case, I hope it backfires and he ends up losing everything. There is nothing hypocritical about it, I do not like piracy and same can be applied to patent infringment however I explained why I doubt IMMENSELY that any such infringment took place here for reasons I stated above, I think this guy is no better than benefit frauds or scam artists, he is playing the system trying to cheat it in order to scam some money. If it looks like a duck, acts like a duck and sounds like a duck then safe to assume it is a duck.

Edited December 15, 2012 by Dragoonlordz

[Maf]

Let's hope this doesn't cost OEI a lot of money.

That's what it's all about in the end.

Lawyers cost money, defending or otherwise.

[Janmanden]

I don't quite understand what the purpose of the U.S. patent system is about, except trying to make others pay for their own inventions, rip-off, because it seems to be revolving more around describing how to do something that's been done already rather than actually inventing something. Both of these patent claims are of a later date than any talking heads and lip syncing I have seen.

 

I would be nice to see what the patent is about in detail.

[greylord]

Sorry but McRo is clearly fishing here. A chancer. Few things point to this for me. Firstly he has filed individual lawsuits against all major publishers and a vast amount of developers, he has apparently asked for jury trials in each case and funny how this patent has existed for over a decade and yet only now is getting around to trying to stop people doing what he claims they are doing (without even giving examples of where or how doing it). I stinks of someone trying to scam the system. He deserves nothing if that is the case, I hope it backfires and he ends up losing everything. There is nothing hypocritical about it, I do not like piracy and same can be applied to patent infringment however I explained why I doubt IMMENSELY that any such infringment took place here for reasons I stated above, I think this guy is no better than benefit frauds or scam artists, he is playing the system trying to cheat it in order to scam some money. If it looks like a duck, acts like a duck and sounds like a duck then safe to assume it is a duck.

 

Reading the paperwork it appears that it's off a programming branching tree. Patent looks like it was filed 2001, though the research and paperwork to resolve infringement wasn't actually finished until 2011/2012.

 

I don't think OE will be the main culprits in this...

 

Others may be though if they are guilty.

 

With patent buying, it's similar to Disney buying Lucasfilm. Simply because Disney buys it and then pursues copyright more vigorously than Lucasfilm did against independants does NOT mean Disney suddenly does not own any rights to Star Wars.

 

That's a strawman that many toss around simply to justify piracy.

 

The same applies to patents.

 

My personal thoughts are that Blue won't win the lawsuit, but that's because I looked over the court papers. It has nothing to do with fishing or anything else. It doesn't matter if they are fishing anymore than it would if Disney started suing over Star Wars rights. Disney now owns Star Wars, end of story.

 

Rights don't end becuase they are purchased by someone else.

 

At least depending on your view of piracy. According to the majority views in the Piracy thread...if Blue actually holds the rights, and others are using those without those rights...it's piracy. Same as if you used gamecode that you didn't purchase (aka...playing a pirated game).

 

Funny how quickly people shift their attitudes towards piracy when the shoe is on the other foot.

 

I don't think Blue will win the lawsuit overall, but for completely different reasons than what some are looking at. The entire reasonings that have been tossed up so far on why Blue should lose besides me have dealt with trying to justify piracy.

 

That's ironic.

 

Blue I think will lose, but it has nothing to do with piracy or anything similar to that. If you read the case files you might be able to figure why I think they will lose.

 

That said, if it turns out that they are justified it doesn't matter if they purchased the rights or not, according to the feelings on the piracy thread expressed by the majority that are NOT I (in fact that's why I point it out, I think I'm more lenient on the entire piracy thing than most on the OE forums, hence why I figured there would be hypocrisy with statements here), the owners of the rights should be paid....period. Taking their creation without paying for it is stealing (once again, according to majority statements on the piracy thread).

 

I've often said the biggest pirates are not individuals typically, but businesses and corporations. If it turns out that the infringement is justified in court, it's simply par for the course. Nothing truly new. Truthfully this is more common than piracy of movies, games, and music.

 

Obsidian isn't the big fish though...they aren't getting anything from OE really, even if they win. There are bigger fish in this entire thing, that's where the money is. As always, follow the money, it will bring you to the true origins behind the entire thing.

 

I just hope it doesn't cost the small fry (I know OE seems large, and they may be to some, but really, they are small in relation to many...hence yes, they are the small fry here) that much. Court costs can get expensive at times.

 

Once again, in case you missed it though, Blue may lose the case (I expect it) but it has nothing of whether they are fishing, own the rights, or anything to that matter. I think they probably DO own the rights...that's not why they are going to lose.

[greylord]

I don't quite understand what the purpose of the U.S. patent system is about, except trying to make others pay for their own inventions, rip-off, because it seems to be revolving more around describing how to do something that's been done already rather than actually inventing something. Both of these patent claims are of a later date than any talking heads and lip syncing I have seen.

 

I would be nice to see what the patent is about in detail.

 

It's not on the talking heads, it's about the actual process of how those talking heads work. There are different methods of lip synching and talking heads out there. This one addresses a particular form of branching which determines how those talking heads work. The claim is that instead of another branching tree or different process...the determination of the lip synching utilized the particular creation of the rights holder rather than other forms created by others,

 

This could be easy to show, though it's going to be interesting to see how they discovered which process was used by the companies without having violated the rights of the companies they are accusing in the process (they'd have to open and look at the code, then analyze it in order to do that, and this is where Blue could have violated the rights of whoever owns THOSE).

[Dragoonlordz]

I don't quite understand what the purpose of the U.S. patent system is about, except trying to make others pay for their own inventions, rip-off, because it seems to be revolving more around describing how to do something that's been done already rather than actually inventing something. Both of these patent claims are of a later date than any talking heads and lip syncing I have seen.

 

I would be nice to see what the patent is about in detail.

 

It's not on the talking heads, it's about the actual process of how those talking heads work. There are different methods of lip synching and talking heads out there. This one addresses a particular form of branching which determines how those talking heads work. The claim is that instead of another branching tree or different process...the determination of the lip synching utilized the particular creation of the rights holder rather than other forms created by others,

 

This could be easy to show, though it's going to be interesting to see how they discovered which process was used by the companies without having violated the rights of the companies they are accusing in the process (they'd have to open and look at the code, then analyze it in order to do that, and this is where Blue could have violated the rights of whoever owns THOSE).

 

He has no proof any developer or publisher has done what he claimed, what he is doing is fishing in the sense he is filing against every single one in the hopes that can prove any of them did do it. He is not filing against specific ones has proof against, filing against everyone just incase and this is what fishing refers to. He is a chancer, he is taking them all to court every single publisher and developer he can find (with individual cases) because has no evidence any did anything wrong. Hoping on random chance one of them might have done what claims but no proof any have done so prior to filing his claims. He has not discovered any evidence of developers or publishers doing it.

 

He is abusing the system and reason why filing separate cases is so when court see's that one after another has not broken any patents they won't throw all his claims out of court. If on individual basis the worst might do is throw that specific case out not all of them. It's like if I had drawn a map, then taken every single store or library in the world that might have a map on the wall to court incase any of them had used / made copy of one of mine without my permission.

 

So yeh he deserves to be cleaned out financially.

Edited December 15, 2012 by Dragoonlordz

[greylord]

I don't quite understand what the purpose of the U.S. patent system is about, except trying to make others pay for their own inventions, rip-off, because it seems to be revolving more around describing how to do something that's been done already rather than actually inventing something. Both of these patent claims are of a later date than any talking heads and lip syncing I have seen.

 

I would be nice to see what the patent is about in detail.

 

It's not on the talking heads, it's about the actual process of how those talking heads work. There are different methods of lip synching and talking heads out there. This one addresses a particular form of branching which determines how those talking heads work. The claim is that instead of another branching tree or different process...the determination of the lip synching utilized the particular creation of the rights holder rather than other forms created by others,

 

This could be easy to show, though it's going to be interesting to see how they discovered which process was used by the companies without having violated the rights of the companies they are accusing in the process (they'd have to open and look at the code, then analyze it in order to do that, and this is where Blue could have violated the rights of whoever owns THOSE).

 

He has no proof any developer or publisher has done what he claimed, what he is doing is fishing in the sense he is filing against every single one in the hopes that can prove any of them did do it. He is not filing against specific ones has proof against, filing against everyone just incase and this is what fishing refers to. He is a chancer, he is taking them all to court every single publisher and developer he can find (with individual cases) because has no evidence any did anything wrong. Hoping on random chance one of them might have done what claims but no proof any have done so prior to filing his claims. He has not discovered any evidence of developers or publishers doing it.

 

He is abusing the system and reason why filing separate cases is so when court see's that one after another has not broken any patents they won't throw all his claims out of court. If on individual basis the worst might do is throw that specific case out not all of them. It's like if I had drawn a map, then taken every single store or library in the world that might have a map on the wall to court incase any of them had used / made copy of one of mine without my permission.

 

So yeh he deserves to be cleaned out financially.

 

Well, if there's no evidence, he just committed economic suicide. Everyone of the cases will be thrown out without evidence. It won't just be one, it won't just be maybe, it's open and closed before it gets off the ground.

 

Haven't seen anything indicating there is or isn't any evidence, just the filings. Filing with no evidence would be the tantamount of epic stupidity though.

[Dragoonlordz]

Well, if there's no evidence, he just committed economic suicide. Everyone of the cases will be thrown out without evidence. It won't just be one, it won't just be maybe, it's open and closed before it gets off the ground.

 

Haven't seen anything indicating there is or isn't any evidence, just the filings. Filing with no evidence would be the tantamount of epic stupidity though.

 

He may be counting on fact asking for jury for them. Sway opinion rather than relying on prior evidence, he may also be hoping some evidence comes up during the course of each case maybe making a claim like he has reason to believe x or y has used z but x or y would not let him check to find out so wants them to hand over the code for all their game engines have used in past decade during cases for examination. There is simply no way for him to have proof that over 100+ developers or publishers have done what he claims. There is also no evidence supplied in the filings themselves and no reference to any that I could see.

Edited December 15, 2012 by Dragoonlordz

[Dragoonlordz]

Correct me if I am wrong but seems they do not even own the trademark for the name they filing under against all the publishers and developers...

[Lephys]

Another problem with the patent system nowadays is that patents aren't used as intended anymore. If you came up with a specific design for a coffee maker, no one else is supposed to be able to use THAT design. They cannot literally copy your design.

 

But, now, the patent office is RIDICULOUS. You've got like 72 million patents floating around, with descriptions like "A device that uses electricity and performs math" or "a device with a rectangular shape that holds paper upright." What the hell is that crap? You might as well just patent food, or levers, or the wheel.

 

It's pretty silly. So, no, I don't have any pity for that guy who spent a bunch of money trying to patent the wheel, who's going around claiming that people are wrongfully stealing his design. (That guy probably doesn't exist... for the record.)

[alanschu]

Well, if there's no evidence, he just committed economic suicide. Everyone of the cases will be thrown out without evidence. It won't just be one, it won't just be maybe, it's open and closed before it gets off the ground.

 

Haven't seen anything indicating there is or isn't any evidence, just the filings. Filing with no evidence would be the tantamount of epic stupidity though.

 

It's not like Monster Cable doesn't do the exact same thing though. And they are still around.

 

They actually tried suing Disney for the movie "Monsters, Inc."