The UK patent office is not the issue. You can be in breach of a US patent by making money in the US, wherever you're based. I think it's ludicrous though, to be able to patent an idea without even having envisaged/detailed a tool/product/scenario that can execute it - it leaves us all wide open to patent-trolling in the future. (I'm imagining where the Kinect team will go next & thinking about heading them off - not cheap, but potentially lucrative). In answer to another commentator who suggested they'd wait for a plane ticket, if proceedings are issued/notice is served, if you don't defend, you're just found guilty & will have costs to pay. (Understandable really). So it's not really a solution. Blitter, I hear what you're saying though & it does sound crazy that companies pursue this. I think game developers have been misled/confused by the long-standing 'advice' that ideas cannot be copyright. Clearly, ideas (if 'clearly' spelled out) CAN be patented & the likes of Apple, Google, HTC, Samsung etc have been dealing with this on both sides for some time. Like most here, I'm most certainly not an expert on patent law, but I do feel that we should all pay close attention to what's currently unfolding.
Already materials exist Those nasty Governments just dont want to tell you. This is a very closed controlled world. In fact it is not a very nice world at all right now for the massed. Only those at the top of the pyramid are laughing One day their souls will be destroyed aswell as those patent trolls, just like Voldemorts
The "ideas" being patented were not invented, most are purely side effects rather than happy accidents or better still, perserveering and pioneering a dream. My plan now has evolved, but I won't be posting it in case a troll reads. There's a tweet going around which I did find interesting: "Very interesting read on current state of patents in US from NPR - goo.gl/ic2D5"
That's a very good article on the state of software patents... I hope I'm not going to offend religious people here but this is a fact in history: Religion held back science for hundreds of years - people were killed and tortured for new radical ideas that did not conform with the church - and it looks like software patents and all the lawyer fees will do the same thing for innovation now...
The end of Angry Birds? Lodsys patent saga rages on. http://www.portfolio.com/views/blogs/the-tech-observer/2011/07/22/lodsys-sues-angry-birds-maker-rovio-over-patents This is getting ridiculous, for a first time developer, it seems preposterous that we now have to walk around on egg shells to avoid getting sued by what is predominantly a company that has as much respect from me as spam bots. Rovio can defend themselves, but what about indies..
silly thread title.. why should it be the end of angry birds.. and its actualy old news (fosspatent showed it on 22nd hehe) that they added rovio to the table.. but being able to defend onself does not mean you will win.. i doubt that someone will go in a lengthy court battle against lodsys.. most likely they will settle and become a lodsys licensee and be done with it.. the only matter apple is involved is their IAP system and income which may or may not be in "danger".. since they already own licenses to the patents of lodsys . can't see what the big fuss is.. if you get a nice letter of lodsys the cheapest way out is to pay.. they wanted what 0,5 odd percent of your winnings.. a dealbreaker.. if you earn a million you have to pay 5k.. if you hire a lawyer you can pay him a couple hundred dollars an hour.. do the math whats cheaper.. to go to court or to license the patent for the odd few years it will be around.. wolven games is currently out of the lawsuite.. probably they just paid for a license which are peanuts in comparsion to anything else..
Start paying one of them then the rest come out of the woodwork and the costs start to add up. If the wording was not ambiguous then fine but in the usual way of lawyer speak it is easy to read into the patent all sorts of apparent infringements. Mike
You're right... Devs could say: "ok, let's pay them and move on with making games", but at the same time you're victimising yourself into even more trouble. "Look, that guy actually paid! So, what else do we have for him?"
