Uniloc In Such A Rush To Sue 'Minecraft' For Patent Infringement, It Didn't Even Spell The Name Right

from the yes-in-eastern-texas dept

Last time we visited Notch, the creator of Minecraft, and his legal woes, he was being sued for trademark infringement over his company Mojang's latest game, Scrolls. That suit was eventually settled—though unfortunately not over a Quake 3 match as Notch proposed. We probably won’t get a similar offer from Notch in this new scenario: he’s being sued for patent infringement by the Eastern Texas-based patent troll Uniloc. This is the same Uniloc whose suit against Microsoft led to the CAFC ruling that 25% of all profits for a single patent infringement claim was just a tad excessive.

So why exactly is Mojang getting sued for patent infringement? Well, Uniloc was awarded a patent for a “System and Method for Preventing Unauthorized Access to Electronic Data” back in 2005 (Patent # 6,857,067). The primary claim is that since Mojang has an Android game that uses a network to communicate with an authorization server to perform a license validation check, Mojang has willfully infringed on the patent. The game named in the suit is “Mindcraft”—which of course is not actually the name of Mojang’s game. While it is very possible that Mojang may be infringing this patent, Notch stated in a follow up tweet that he is more than willing to “throw piles of money at making sure they don't get a cent“. On that same front, this patent could also be invalidated if it is successfully challenged in court.

Perhaps Notch can take some solace in knowing that he is apparently not alone in being sued. According to Reddit, a number of other game companies are being sued for infringing this same patent. This list includes the likes of Gameloft, EA, Square Enix, Halfbrick Studios and a number of other developers. This practice of suing multiple parties for infringing a single patent is a typical sign of a patent troll. It is also a symptom of the huge mess that is software patents.

In a followup blog post, Notch reflected on the idea of software patents and patents in general. He even provided a nice illustration of theft, copyright infringement and patent infringement.

But there is no way in hell you can convince me that it’s beneficial for society to not share ideas. Ideas are free. They improve on old things, make them better, and this results in all of society being better. Sharing ideas is how we improve.

A common argument for patents is that inventors won’t invent unless they can protect their ideas. The problem with this argument is that patents apply even if the infringer came up with the idea independently. If the idea is that easy to think of, why do we need to reward the person who happened to be first?

The post is short but full of some really good insights. Some of them we have touched on before, such as the idea that patents are actually harmful to the software industry. This suit also illustrates another point we have recently written about: how it is impossible to avoid infringing someone's patent. On the bright side, as more such patent infringement suits are filed and more companies and individuals are harmed by the current patent system, perhaps we will see those in Washington take notice and implement some real reforms.

Filed Under: , , ,
Companies: mojang, uniloc

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Uniloc In Such A Rush To Sue 'Minecraft' For Patent Infringement, It Didn't Even Spell The Name Right”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

This seems confused on a couple of levels. First, it seems like an overreaction so much that it seems to be reaching for anything to complain about.

Second, “Thank you Captain Obvious,” like, “No shit, Sherlock,” is meant to point out that the person said something pointedly, blatantly, and objectively so; yet, “Monkeys could fly out of your butt, too,” is used to indicate that what was said is so improbably as to be impossible.

On the other hand, it is possible that you have mixed up your meds to such an extent that you think monkeys flying out of butts is not only likely, but actually constantly occurring and is therefore worthy of derision for pointing out.

“Of course monkeys are flying out of my butt. Why don’t you point out that the sky is magenta while you’re at it, Sherlock.”

Jeff Rowberg (user link) says:

"A" problem, not "The" problem

A common argument for patents is that inventors won?t invent unless they can protect their ideas. The problem with this argument is that patents apply even if the infringer came up with the idea independently.

That is a problem for sure. But there is an even bigger problem: that argument is empirically false. Inventors will still invent if they can’t protect their ideas (and many people actively reject any protection, for many reasons.

That Anonymous Coward (profile) says:

As I suggested over on BoingBoing in their coverage of this, it would be a real shame if someone figured out how to crowdsource finding prior art to sink the entire portfolio of patents Uniloc controls. Just gut the troll, then use the framework to start working down the list of everyones favorite visitors to East Texas.
Maybe a running total of patents sunk would embarrass law makers into action to fix the obviously broken system.

That Anonymous Coward (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

The problem could be people being unaware of the EFF project, sometimes you need to put a face on the problem to motivate people.
Breaking the sections of required work into small pieces people feel they can tackle a bit here, a bit there.

While it might require a lot of work, breaking it up means many hands make lighter work. So looking at how the process is being done now vs how else it could be done might be in order. It is only when we stop trying that it is impossible.

Nathan F (profile) says:

Ideas are our countries strength

What really bothers me about the whole software patent war thicket going on is the double think taking place. Politicians keep harping about how IP is the US’s best product right now, yet they have a nigh killing field in the patent office for any new idea. Soon as a device gets to market most often a “patent troll” comes along and says they are violating a patent from 200x and that they are only suing because they “have to protect their business and shareholder value”.

What is it going to take for Washington to see that software patents in particular (and some design patents.. I’m looking at you Apple) are stifling new ideas for making a better product?

Jeff Rowberg (user link) says:

Re: Re:

Because it wouldn’t stop DRM, it would only make it more expensive, a cost increase that would surely be passed on to customers. A patent in the hands of a patent troll is absolutely worthless unless somebody infringes. Therefore, the best business model for a troll is to claim infringement on stuff that is (1) widely used and (2) considered too important not to have by those who use it.

Roman (user link) says:


A few problems – as we know patents are supposed to be for inventions – patenting software makes no sense, since you cannot invent math (which is what software is) you can only discover cool algorithms, but those algorithms already existed in a sense.

Second, the patent in question is on DRM. Even if we accept patentability of software, you’d have to say that only features should get patented – DRM is not a feature, in fact it’s an anti-feature. If you write software that prints a file you want that program do the best damn job at printing it can. If you design a program to tell the user “no, I won’t print this file, because I don’t like you” you’re designing your software to be defective.

Anonymous Coward says:

The patent industry is vital for the future of American politicians. By imposing an arbitrary tax on any business that would contribute to the economy, high unemployment is maintained, allowing them to pass any arbitrary law by labeling the bill as a “jobs bill”, and therefore preserving their power.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

Code is covered by copyright. If you produce different code to achieve the same result that’s ok.

A patent is about achieving a result using a specified method, so you could infringe even if you wrote everything from scratch. This is one of the major problems of software patents; it’s far too easy to infringe accidentally.

If you look at the patent there is no code specified anywhere, and I doubt this troll has actually got any code which implements this method.

staff says:

another biased article

?Patent troll?

Call it what you will…patent hoarder, patent troll, non-practicing entity, shell company, etc. It all means one thing: ?we?re using your invention and we?re not going to pay or stop?. This is just dissembling by large infringers and their paid puppets to kill any inventor support system. It is purely about legalizing theft. The fact is, many of the large multinationals who defame inventors in this way themselves make no products in the US or create any American jobs and it is their continued blatant theft which makes it impossible for the true creators to do so.

Prior to eBay v Mercexchange, small entities had a viable chance at commercializing their inventions. If the defendant was found guilty, an injunction was most always issued. Then the inventor small entity could enjoy the exclusive use of his invention in commercializing it. Unfortunately, injunctions are often no longer available to small entity inventors because of the Supreme Court decision so we have no fair chance to compete with much larger entities who are now free to use our inventions. Essentially, large infringers now have your gun and all the bullets. Worse yet, inability to commercialize means those same small entities will not be hiring new employees to roll out their products and services. And now some of those same parties who killed injunctions for small entities and thus blocked their chance at commercializing now complain that small entity inventors are not commercializing. They created the problem and now they want to blame small entities for it. What dissembling! If you don?t like this state of affairs (your unemployment is running out), tell your Congress member. Then maybe we can get some sense back in the patent system with injunctions fully enforceable on all infringers by all inventors, large and small.

Those wishing to help fight big business giveaways should contact us as below and join the fight as we are building a network of inventors and other stakeholders to lobby Congress to restore property rights for all patent owners -large and small.

For the truth about trolls, please see http://truereform.piausa.org/default.html#pt.

Jon Burdick (user link) says:

subjective realpolitik

Patent Troll: what infringers call someone who expects to be paid after incurring miscellaneous research expenses, then inventing something new and useful and nonobvious while paying the rent, and then incurring additional fees to pay the patent attorney and the patent office. Examples: Alexander Graham Bell, the Wright Brothers, Guglielmo Marconi, Thomas Edison, and Edward Hebern (inventor of cryptanalytic technology ripped off by the U.S. govt.) to name but a paltry few. Compare “pioneer”, “trailblazer”.

Free Rider: what Patent Trolls call infringers who expect others to shoulder all the R&D burdens alone, but then feel free jump in to reap the rewards of the other guy’s work in their perky, energetic, what-me-worry?-I’m-not-fatigued-by-any-R&D-struggles state of being. Compare “scavenger”.

Not all patentees are trailblazing pioneers, of course, and not all granted patents ought to have issued. But fights should be about individual patents, and patent examination procedures, not the patent system as a whole, unless you have something better with which to replace it. As it is, individual and small-business inventors at least have a roll of the dice to try and stake out a claim as to what value they add to society by inventing new things (and then be compensated fairly therefor, based on arm’s-length licensing negotiations); otherwise, the only route is to sign up with some big firm, say, McPatents Research, Inc. and develop work-for-hire on the basis of a flat salary and the possibility of a gold watch after twenty-five years.

Getting a little sick and tired of reading forum posts some of which seem to be written by couch-potato gamers — who might totally freak if it seems like a patent holder wants to be paid for developing tech that makes the gamer’s favorite game possible (or in some cases, technology not required for playing the game, but “required” in the sense of economic feasibility — without some DRM, game won’t go to market). “Soviet Russia was never annoyed by patent law.”

Jon Burdick (user link) says:


“In 2007, I received a call from Steve Jobs, the Chief Executive Officer of Apple. In the months before the call, several employees had moved between the two companies. On the call, Mr. Jobs expressed concern about employees being hired away from Apple by Palm. As a solution, Mr. Jobs proposed an arrangement between Palm and Apple by which neither company would hire the other’s employees, including high tech employees. Mr. Jobs also suggested that if Palm did not agree to such an arrangement, Palm could face lawsuits alleging infringements of Apple’s many patents.”

Steve Jobs. Using patents to attempt to conspire to suppress developer salaries. Now THAT’s a patent troll.


Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published.

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...