Support NeoGAF

[Panajev2001a]

http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph...endo+AND+"touch"&RS=(AN/Nintendo+AND+"touch")

Now that I think it could also apply to Super Mario Sunshine's camera (the N64 hatdwar reference might be just a trick).

I know it is not a very recent patent, but as a gift I will give you some bonus cookies.

Gekko's patent (Nintendo's one, IBM has a similar patent I'd think):

http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph...N/Nintendo+AND+touch&RS=AN/Nintendo+AND+touch

 

[Sho Nuff]

"game program executing processing system to detect whether a player controlled character is moving on a sloped surface and to modify the character's moving speed as a function of the slope of the surface."

Can someone explain what these patents mean? Do they mean I can no longer have my character slow down as he runs up a hill?

 

[Panajev2001a]

"game program executing processing system to detect whether a player controlled character is moving on a sloped surface and to modify the character's moving speed as a function of the slope of the surface."

Can someone explain what these patents mean? Do they mean I can no longer have my character slow down as he runs up a hill?

You can, but you cannot do it the same way as they do .

 

[teepo]

patents on software codes are stupid.

 

[GaimeGuy]

patents on software codes are stupid.

Just like patents on operating systems, books, music, and movies, right?

 

[Ninja Scooter]

didn't Sega patent some of the camera technology for Virtua Racing and Virtua Fighting, forcing Namco to pay some royalties off Tekken and Ridge Racer?

 

[OG_Original Gamer]

HA, Someone got owned.

 

[LakeEarth]

Something tells me we're gonna see a lot less running up hills in games now.

 

[Redbeard]

How could anyone possibly patent that? That's insanity.

 

[robochimp]

They patent genes too.

 

[ferricide]

Just like patents on operating systems, books, music, and movies, right?

you don't patent books and movies. =P and you don't patent music the way you mean it, since you obviously don't understand the difference between "patent" and "copyright."

copyright makes a lot of sense, although corporations tend to try and abuse it, of course. software patents make varying degrees of sense depending on how basic or obvious the thing being patented is and how much granting the patent will make innovation (or even merely creation) difficult/impossible for other companies.

 

[GaimeGuy]

you don't patent books and movies. =P and you don't patent music the way you mean it, since you obviously don't understand the difference between "patent" and "copyright."

copyright makes a lot of sense, although corporations tend to try and abuse it, of course. software patents make varying degrees of sense depending on how basic or obvious the thing being patented is and how much granting the patent will make innovation (or even merely creation) difficult/impossible for other companies.

oh... yeah....

*shoots himself*

Stupid mistake.

 

[Dan]

Just like patents on operating systems, books, music, and movies, right?

Umm, you don't patent books, music and movies. Those are copyrighted. Not sure what, if anything, is done for operating systems as a whole...

I really don't see how this is surprising. Programming and coding is just like inventing, but with a less tangible medium. You're still devising a method, process or system to produce some kind of result.

Only question is how minor or major the code/concept can be to deserve a patent.

 

[Sho Nuff]

Ever wonder why the camera doesn't pan in and out smoothly when switching your view in racing games? Yeah, that's because SEGA OWNS THE PATENT. If a game does that, they are paying Sega.

Retarded.

 

[Ranger X]

Patenting software code is completely stupid. It's like if there were patent on an instrument i would want to use to make music.

 

[mrklaw]

Can I still slow down running up hills?

 

[MightyHedgehog]

Anyone remember those old-ass Atari software patents? The ones that they used to sue anyone possible back in the early 90's? Those were ridiculous.

 

[gofreak]

I really don't see how this is surprising. Programming and coding is just like inventing, but with a less tangible medium. You're still devising a method, process or system to produce some kind of result.

Only question is how minor or major the code/concept can be to deserve a patent.

The question is how obvious something is. Certain things are being patented that are so obvious it just makes no sense. To illustrate, if you have a programming class in college, and you give the class an exercise to do, you'll find the same solutions cropping up over and over again - some things are so obvious that many people will arrive at the same solution independently. Some companies are going along and patenting widely used algorithms etc. that have become standards over long periods of time - that just isn't right. It's stifling innovation and progress...software engineers and programmers have to come with arbritrary and gimmicky solutions to problems simply to avoid doing it the same way as something that has been patented. A lot of time is lost checking algorithms against those already patented. It's just a silly situation! Some algorithms are deserving of patents, but a lot that aren't have been patented..unfortunately the patent office usually just doesn't understand these things..they're just rubber-stamping them without looking into them any further, simply because they are not qualified to do so. If it hasn't already been done, an independent watchdog should be set up to monitor patent applications and approvals in the software industry, imo.

 

[The Faceless Master]

Ever wonder why the camera doesn't pan in and out smoothly when switching your view in racing games? Yeah, that's because SEGA OWNS THE PATENT. If a game does that, they are paying Sega.

Retarded.

shit, i forgot all about that... but now that you mention it, i remember it was a big deal on bbses back in the day...

 

[COCKLES]

Wonder if they have patent on Reggie's stupidity.

 

[Fafalada]

they're just rubber-stamping them without looking into them any further, simply because they are not qualified to do so. If it hasn't already been done, an independent watchdog should be set up to monitor patent applications and approvals in the software industry, imo.

In a patent office that approved such nonsense as perpetual motion machines, free energy generators, lossless compression of arbitrary random data etc. I think there's a lot more that warrants monitoring then just software industry applications.

But I agree, software patents are generally much more of a bad then good thing, especially nowadays when abuse is becoming more and more frequent.

 

[Dan]

The question is how obvious something is. Certain things are being patented that are so obvious it just makes no sense.

Basically what I meant. I've done a fair share of coding and taken a few courses so I know what you're talking about.

If it hasn't already been done, an independent watchdog should be set up to monitor patent applications and approvals in the software industry, imo.

I think that's fair. I might go further and reduce the duration of a software patent too.

Although, informed and knowledgeable people should be in charge of approving ALL patents, not just software ones. But I've studied a lot of the patent office's role in telecommunication development, and well, they've fucked up often.