Curse

zwei2stein · Dec 31, 2008, 08:29 PM // 20:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chthon

...

It just begs for whole bag of lag-based issues (turn around, watch things appear out of thin air, lock back where you were looking, stuff is gone untill it is fetched again, no more quick scan of surroundings, unacceptable). Besides, players usually want to interact with stuff out of their vision (i.e. GW people would invite trading stranger to party to be able to spacebar to them without having to locate them visually, ever popular dots on minimap)

As such, if their technology works the way you say (data sent to client based upon field of vision of player), everyone can be calm, because I highly doubt that any developers would use this approach. Maybe with exception of non-games where people just sit around and chat or hold huge virtual conferences.

Smurf Minions · Dec 31, 2008, 08:49 PM // 20:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wish Swiftdeath

http://wenderella.com/2008/05/most-r...one-right-now/

http://www.invention-protection.com/...g_patents.html

God Bless America!

http://www.newscientist.com/article/...ng-patent.html

so i bet someone from worlds.com used doubleclicking to make their stupid programs. they can be sued too!

i think i would be better of patenting triple-clicking now before its to late!

Skitsefrenik · Dec 31, 2008, 08:55 PM // 20:55

Will we here from Anet anytime soon? I would be nice to here their side of the story.

tmakinen · Dec 31, 2008, 09:14 PM // 21:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skitsefrenik

Will we here from Anet anytime soon? I would be nice to here their side of the story.

There isn't any 'ANet's side of the story' ... it is pretty clear that the patent in question doesn't apply to GW and since GW is ANet's only published game they are free to /shrug and continue as usual. I'm not familiar enough with the full repertoire of NCSoft to say whether there are games to which the patent applies. Worlds.com clearly thinks so but that's not a very good indicator of the veracity of the claim. If Worlds.com is by now just a front end for a general purpose patent troll firm they may not have enough technical knowledge to make a sensible decision.

enter_the_zone · Dec 31, 2008, 10:01 PM // 22:01

Who holds the patent for the original no-graphical MUDs. Cause those probably fall into this so-called category as well.

And, technically, we're all interacting in a virtual "world" right now, using client (IE/FF/Opera)- Server (web-server) technology. Was there a 3D requirement in that patent? If not, all RP message boards surely fall into the so-called patent as well.

Clearly, this is a case of a retard, or a retarded establishment, not understanding what the hell they're doing in granting this patent.

The Meth · Dec 31, 2008, 10:32 PM // 22:32

Ridiculous as the patent may be, it is still a patent. That means a trial and that means expenses. I can't remember where I read this, but expenses on defending against patent troll claims often cost $1-2 million to get through and win a trial. Even if NCsoft wins the chance of getting their expenses back is probably small because worlds.com is simply enforcing their patent (a perfectly logical and reasonable thing), the point of fault lies at the patent office itself and whatever morons decided it was patentable.

Matermine · Dec 31, 2008, 11:35 PM // 23:35

Not a very good idea to sue MMO's...the addicts out there will find Worlds.com (seeing as their address is on their website) and you never know what might happen o.O

Arkantos · Dec 31, 2008, 11:44 PM // 23:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matermine

Not a very good idea to sue MMO's...the addicts out there will find Worlds.com (seeing as their address is on their website) and you never know what might happen o.O

That would involve them leaving their houses and...yeah, not gonna happen.

credit · Dec 31, 2008, 11:45 PM // 23:45

This is all pretty humorous, but I still have one major question: who the RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GO is worlds.com?

Abedeus · Dec 31, 2008, 11:57 PM // 23:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arkantos

That would involve them leaving their houses and...yeah, not gonna happen.

What about umbrellas? You take an umbrella = your eyes don't burn from non-HDR sun = you can go and wtfpwn earths.com headqua... I mean, crapshack and throw some Molotovs at them.

Braxton619 · Jan 01, 2009, 09:13 AM // 09:13

Good luck sueing Blizzard, Microsoft, Sony, EA Games, NcSoft, and much more from this stupid patent crap.

Lol Microsoft will send Bill Gate's ninjas and kick www.worlds.com off the web

enter_the_zone · Jan 01, 2009, 10:07 AM // 10:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leet Tankur

Good luck sueing Blizzard, Microsoft, Sony, EA Games, NcSoft, and much more from this stupid patent crap.

Lol Microsoft will send Bill Gate's ninjas and kick www.worlds.com off the web

I did kind of think, wait till he ([email protected]) tries it with Sony. I can see his head exploding like a water melon already...

Makkert · Jan 01, 2009, 10:52 AM // 10:52

interesting.

But if Worlds get their way, that would open up a monopoly position.
I don't see that happening, for obvious reasons.

Bowstring Badass · Jan 01, 2009, 11:18 AM // 11:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Meth

Ridiculous as the patent may be, it is still a patent. That means a trial and that means expenses. I can't remember where I read this, but expenses on defending against patent troll claims often cost $1-2 million to get through and win a trial. Even if NCsoft wins the chance of getting their expenses back is probably small because worlds.com is simply enforcing their patent (a perfectly logical and reasonable thing), the point of fault lies at the patent office itself and whatever morons decided it was patentable.

You make perfect sense but. GW was out before the patent was officially issued. As were many other MMOs.

kostolomac · Jan 01, 2009, 04:21 PM // 16:21

As long as NC Soft's lawyer and the jury aren't retards NC Soft should win this.

Abedeus · Jan 01, 2009, 05:56 PM // 17:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by kostolomac

As long as NC Soft's lawyer and the jury aren't retards NC Soft should win this.

You know, this is America.

...We are lost :[

Chthon · Jan 01, 2009, 11:34 PM // 23:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Meth

Unfortunately, as mentioned, they are a foreign company being sued in Texas. With the economy, and depending on exactly where in Texas it is (there are some specificly BAD places to be sued over a patent), NCsoft is effectively guilty until prove innocent.

Assuming NCSoft doesn't settle, this case would almost certainly be decided on summary judgment by a judge. No jury of biased hicks involved. And, while there may be a few biased hick federal judges in Texas, appellate review of summary judgment is done afresh by the appellate court.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bowstring Badass

You make perfect sense but. GW was out before the patent was officially issued. As were many other MMOs.

Once issued, a patent is considered effective from its date of filing, or, in the case of patents that follow-up another patent in specific ways, effective from the filing date of the parent patent.

pumpkin pie · Jan 02, 2009, 02:52 AM // 02:52

The Suit
NCSoft's Reply
These are the no good lawyers
many other patent related to server chat systems so, if everyone of those patent holder were to file suit ....

rofl

a chat client suing a game client?

hrmz, does not look good for NCSoft...

the patent '690 part has a precedents.

worlds.com is a patent troll lol

according to "text of '690 patent", and whoever they are does not seem to be the same people as Worlds.com formerly called worlds chat

AKB48 · Jan 02, 2009, 03:59 AM // 03:59

Worlds.com needs money, and the lawsuit is a nice mask which it uses to ask NCSoft for cash. Simple as that

Let's hope NCSoft got enough $$

Courage! · Jan 02, 2009, 05:37 AM // 05:37

Shutting down WoW would bring massive chaos from the 11 million ppl who play (and i just got it

)