Stupid Patent Tricks: Playing Multiplayer Games on Handhelds a No No.

[Ed Hansberry]

<a href="http://www.pocketgamer.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2397">http://www.pocketgamer.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2397</a><br /><br />"Peer-to-Peer Systems LLC announced today that it has served a Complaint on Palm, Inc., the Milpitas, California-based maker of personal digital assistants ("PDAs"). The Complaint alleges that the use of Palm PDAs and clone PDAs to play multiple player games wirelessly and interactively on two or more such devices directly infringes Peer-to-Peer's U.S. Patent No. 5,618,045 ("the '045 patent") relating to methods and apparatus for playing interactive, multiple player computer games on ad hoc, wireless local area networks."<br /><br />Good grief. :roll:

[Rob Borek]

"Gee, let's take an existing concept, apply it to handheld devices, and patent it!" :roll:

The patent's not worthy of even being my toilet paper...

[feo]

Is this another one of those things like years ago when a company (software toolworks, I beleive) said they had the patent on multimedia?
This kind of things suck.... I have to go get a cup of coffee now (unless thta activity is also patented...)

[andydempsey]

bollocks.

[sullivanpt]

I didn't read the patent, I doubt it's enforcable, but I have questions about the word "ad hoc" wireless network. Does this imply the patent doesn't apply if I'm using a fixed wireless network, such as a cell phone network? (or a home wireless router)

I smell a rat.

[Kaber]

Well, how many games on Pocket PC are unlicensed versions of existing games with only minor changes to their theme or gameplay? Are they new games just because they are on a new platform and change a few sprites and sounds? How legal is it to sell a console emulator for Pocket PC when you have to know that the majority of people will be playing games they do not have original licenses (the original game cart or disk) for? And how many people are making and selling Pocket PC themes with copywrited material on Handango and PocketGear?

I believe there are a great many questions unanswered when it comes to our handheld addiction.

But trying to patent multiplayer gaming over ad hoc wireless... come on. That's like trying to patent wireless internet browsing from a Pocket PC.

[Peter Foot]

Is this another one of those things like years ago when a company (software toolworks, I beleive) said they had the patent on multimedia?
This kind of things suck.... I have to go get a cup of coffee now (unless thta activity is also patented...)

Yes and like British Telecom claiming patent of the Hyperlink. :roll:

[jizmo]

Here in Finland patents are very, *very* hard to get and it really seems like the things are quite the opposite in the states. Here's a classic from the last fall.

another long URL (http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1='6368227'.WKU.&OS=PN/6368227&RS=PN/6368227)

And there are thousands of others that are just as smart as this one. :roll:

/jizmo

[jizmo]

+can someone tell me why the [url] thing doesn't work?.. I've used it many times before with success.

A bad patent, maybe? :?

/jizmo

[Ed Hansberry]

+can someone tell me why the [url] thing doesn't work?.. I've used it many times before with success.

A bad patent, maybe? :?

/jizmo
Dunno. I hate the URL tag. I use the HREF tag. Now, quit breaking my edit of your insanely long URL. :wink:

[jizmo]

Dunno. I hate the URL tag. I use the HREF tag. Now, quit breaking my edit of your insanely long URL. :wink:

:wink:

Thx, Ed

/jizmo

[Pony99CA]

"Gee, let's take an existing concept, apply it to handheld devices, and patent it!" :roll:
Actually, I don't think they're complaining about the handheld part, but the wireless part. Otherwise they would have sued Nintendo for the Game Boy's "wired LAN multiplayer gaming". :-)

That said, does making an existing technology wireless really constitute an invention? LAN parties have been going on for years, and they seem like multiplayer gaming on an ad hoc network.

Steve

[Pony99CA]

Dunno. I hate the URL tag. I use the HREF tag.
Why hate the URL tag? It's slightly easier to use than the HTML Anchor tag (not HREF -- HREF is an attribute, not a tag :-)) because you don't have to put quotation marks around the URL.

Steve

[Ed Hansberry]

Dunno. I hate the URL tag. I use the HREF tag.
Why hate the URL tag? It's slightly easier to use than the HTML Anchor tag (not HREF -- HREF is an attribute, not a tag :-)) because you don't have to put quotation marks around the URL.
I like the HREF attribute/tag/whatever because it works. That @(*^@#$*&@@ URL thing never does what it is supposed to. :soapbox:

[dMores]

i'm going to get a patent on the way i pick my nose !
if ANYONE tries to do it with a finger in EACH nostril then I WILL SUE THEM.

this is rediculous !

[szamot]

i'm going to get a patent on the way i pick my nose !
if ANYONE tries to do it with a finger in EACH nostril then I WILL SUE THEM.

this is rediculous !

I will go for gold and patent wiping butt using paper or any other adhesive article other than a bare finger. That would be something!

[Janak Parekh]

"I like the HREF attribute/tag/whatever because it works. That @(*^@#$*&amp;@@ URL thing never does what it is supposed to."

Sorry for divulging off-topic, but:

Sure it does. Either use text (www.foo.com) or www.foo.com. Both work. Make sure you don't use quote marks, that's what got me for a while..

--janak

[Lotto]

"...The Complaint alleges that the use of Palm PDAs and clone PDAs..."



Well, I don't know about yours, but my PPC is hardly a Palm PDA clone...so we have no fear, eh? :lol:

[Phoenix]

I tell ya, everything's gotta be complicated anymore. What a bunch of dopes. Gimme a break. :roll:

[Kirkaiya]

Here's a good question about this patent : What qualifies as a wireless "handheld" ?

I mean - my laptop is pretty small & light, and with my wireless card, I can easily set up an ad-hoc network with other wireless devides...

And if my laptop doesn't count, then what about a sub-notebook? Some of them are not much bigger than an iPaq with the PC-card sleeve and a folding keyboard...

and then what about a Tablet PC with integrated WLAN in an ad-hoc network? Or the Samsung Nexio? How about the Handheld PCs, like the clamshell Jornada and Nec MobilePro?

Without reading the patent, I'm gonna go out on a limb and say (completely unsubstantiated) that this will be a tough patent-fight to win. Then again, a lot of us said that about the Xerox Unicode patent (speaking of which, what was the final outcome of that? Xerox won, and Palm is going to use Jot, I think - is that right?)

anyway - it just seems that the definition of what a "handheld" or PDA is awfully blurry, and so if it can be found that people were already playing multiplayer games on laptops via an ad-hoc wireless setup, which has been happening for years among the techno-savvy (read: geeks), then peer-2-peer will have problems with this.

finally - Peer 2 Peer - stop abusing patent law for profit - I will NEVER EVER EVER buy ANYTHING from you if you pursue this suit, and will ALWAYS steer my clients clear of any of your products and services

There - my personal BOYCOTT of companies that do stupid patent lawsuits. Who's with me?

[Warwick]

DAMN If only I had though to patent stupid ideas, I could have made a fortune and would be in a position to stop this :@

Damn them all to hell.

I doubt this would stand up in court anyway, is it an international patent? or US only? might be interesting to see what happens.

[Pony99CA]

Without reading the patent, I'm gonna go out on a limb and say (completely unsubstantiated) that this will be a tough patent-fight to win. Then again, a lot of us said that about the Xerox Unicode patent (speaking of which, what was the final outcome of that? Xerox won, and Palm is going to use Jot, I think - is that right?)

First, it's Unistrokes; Unicode is a two-byte character coding system to represent many languages.

Second, the last I heard, Xerox won (http://www.computerworld.com/softwaretopics/software/story/0,10801,66887,00.html). Palm is dropping Graffiti in favor of Graffiti 2 based on Jot, as was reported right here (http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/index.php?topic_id=7201).

Steve

[Mrsuicide]

Without reading the patent, I'm gonna go out on a limb and say (completely unsubstantiated) that this will be a tough patent-fight to win. Then again, a lot of us said that about the Xerox Unicode patent (speaking of which, what was the final outcome of that? Xerox won, and Palm is going to use Jot, I think - is that right?)

First, it's Unistrokes; Unicode is a two-byte character coding system to represent many languages.

Second, the last I heard, Xerox won (http://www.computerworld.com/softwaretopics/software/story/0,10801,66887,00.html). Palm is dropping Graffiti in favor of Graffiti 2 based on Jot, as was reported right here (http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/index.php?topic_id=7201).

Steve

well, way to agree with him buddy :mrgreen:

[Kirkaiya]

Without reading the patent, I'm gonna go out on a limb and say (completely unsubstantiated) that this will be a tough patent-fight to win. Then again, a lot of us said that about the Xerox Unicode patent (speaking of which, what was the final outcome of that? Xerox won, and Palm is going to use Jot, I think - is that right?)

First, it's Unistrokes; Unicode is a two-byte character coding system to represent many languages.

Second, the last I heard, Xerox won (http://www.computerworld.com/softwaretopics/software/story/0,10801,66887,00.html). Palm is dropping Graffiti in favor of Graffiti 2 based on Jot, as was reported right here (http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/index.php?topic_id=7201).

Steve

Yah, what I MEANT, not what i said - that's what I get for typing at like, midnite while watching live War coverage on CNN...

Obviously, I meant Unistrokes, the text-entry method and not Unicode, the text-encoding replacement (pretty much) for ASCII.

anyway, thanx for pointing out my sleep-deprived mind-fart! :-)

And that's what I thought (that Xerox won the suit), just curious if anybody ever challenged them on it again.

[Kirkaiya]

Thanx Mr. Suicide -

Yah, Pony, what gives - you basically reiterated what I said (that Xerox won, and Palm is going to use Jot)... were you just agreeing with me in an aggressive manner, or did you not finish reading the part of my post you quoted?


:?:

[Tim Allen]

I can't believe the US Patent Office continues to grant ever more crazy patents - companies like this must be rolling round on the floor in fits of laughter that they can actually get away with it.

Only the other day someone was granted a patent on persistent cookies redirecting to the same server (http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20030324/090203.shtml) and immediately filed three lawsuits while the ink was still wet on the patent grant.

[Pony99CA]

Yah, Pony, what gives - you basically reiterated what I said (that Xerox won, and Palm is going to use Jot)... were you just agreeing with me in an aggressive manner, or did you not finish reading the part of my post you quoted?
Well, I wasn't going to answer Suicide, as the reason I posted seemed obvious, but apparently it's not. You asked a question; I answered it and provided links to confirmation of your original thoughts. What's the problem? I don't know how that can be "aggressive".

Steve

[Ed Hansberry]

DAMN If only I had though to patent stupid ideas, I could have made a fortune and would be in a position to stop this
Heh heh. I'm gonna be rich. I am working on a patent to patent the process of filing stupid patents. All these idiots will have to pay me just to file their patents! Mwahahahahahahahaha

:grinning devil:

[Pony99CA]

Heh heh. I'm gonna be rich. I am working on a patent to patent the process of filing stupid patents. All these idiots will have to pay me just to file their patents! Mwahahahahahahahaha

Sorry, Ed, but prior art on this is well established. :-D (Not that that has to stop you from suing.... :lol:)

Steve

[Tim Allen]

(Not that that has to stop you from suing.... :lol:)

Steve

Err, actually it does - I'm going to patent suing for patent infringement :lol: