3D Virtual Worlds Patented! Lawsuits Started...

from the oh-come-on... dept

It seems that the ridiculous patent holders are trying to go out with a bang in 2008. Worlds.com, which holds a patent that never should have been issued on virtual worlds has sued NCSoft, makers of a bunch of popular online virtual worlds -- including some that were launched before the patent was even filed for in 2000. The Register link above shows a few examples of such virtual worlds, but you can dig back even further. In 1996 I was using OnLive! Traveler which did all of the things described in the patent described, as can be seen in the video below:
Not surprisingly, the lawsuit is actually being brought by General Patent Corp (GPC), one of a growing number of IP licensing firms who prey on companies (that actually innovate) by trying to enforce incredibly broad and highly questionable patents. Not surprisingly, GPC's execs have been active in protesting any sort of patent reform, claiming it would "mar innovation." I would suggest that patent reform is a hell of a lot less likely to mar innovation than suing innovative companies with overly broad patents that were applied for well after the technology in question was in common use.

Filed Under: patents, virtual worls
Companies: general patent corporation, worlds.com


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  1. icon
    Paul Stout (profile), 31 Dec 2008 @ 2:22am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Mike...are you helping?

    Quote:
    Blanket insult is inaccurate in that my statement was qualified by the modifier "many", and based upon many comments in threads pertaining to patented subject matter involving arts such as electronics/computers/pharma/etc. it seems apparent that many who are making disparaging comments do not have backgrounds in science/engineering and the like.

    ------

    This is an argument I've heard and seen used many times by those who want to disparage those disagreeing with their "lofty" knowledge of whatever subject was being discussed.

    It is, of course, a specious argument. It's used when the author wishes to "talk down" to his audience, basically saying, see, "I'm smarter than you, so you should do as I say".

    Bluntly put, "a background in science/engineering and the like" is not necessary requirement to write or speak intelligently on the subject. It helps, of course, but all that is really required is a modicum of intelligence, some common sense, and the habit of keeping abreast of events in those fields. Experience acquired over ones life time also comes into play.

    Nice try AC, but it doesn't wash...

    And, just so you know I'm not one of those "Many" you refer to, my background is specifically in Electronics Engineering and Computer Science, and well over 40 years of experience in those and related fields.

Add Your Comment

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



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown for basic formatting. (HTML is not supported.)
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Special Affiliate Offer

Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.