The summary said "there hasn't been a single accident under computer control." If the car was stopped at lights, it was hardly under computer control, any more than it would've been had it been parked by the curb.
Are they doing the same thing they did when they said they broke the pre-order record? That is, counting all the copies of D3 they gave away to WoW subscribers who signed up to the Annual Pass as pre-orders. That's the only reason I have the game. I played it for maybe 2 weeks. Then it got old. I played D2 for years.
Quite the opposite. I wonder how many ex LendInkers, frustrated that their legitimate channel for sharing books was denied, threw their hands up in frustration, said "screw playing by their rules then", and took themselves away to the Pirate Bay.
No, no, no, not enough suffixes. It should be believerists. Apparently, "deniers" wasn't perjorative enough, so you need to whack some extra letters on the end to make the term sound even more dramatic.
You do realize most games flop, right? For every Halo/Gears of War/Uncharted there's probably dozens others that fail to recoup their initial costs
No, those sort of "flops" will never get their initial funding, and thus will never get made. I'm sure people will fund games that fail to live up to expectations, but then, that happens with the traditional method too - after all, how many people purchased Daikatana?
It's a great way to ensure only popular crap gets published - endless Halo/Gears of War/Unchated/God of War/Tetris games that sell millions and make tons of profit
Yeah, because when you look at its track record that's what's been made - Shadowrun (turn-based RPG), Doublefine (Adventure Game), Banner Saga (old school hand-animated turn based combat). As opposed to the stuff the traditional publishing houses churn out.
Truth is - plenty of kickstarter projects fail. Plenty of game kickstarter projects fail to meet funding.
And, as you've said, plenty of commercial games are flops. Plenty don't get greenlit either, because some random executive doesn't get it.
Who exactly is going to be paying the game developers in this scenario?
The same people who do now - the end users.
And with what?
Uh, money?
You're suggesting the entire industry should be financed by Kickstarter
Or similar services. Kickstarter is good for indie projects - I imagine you'd need a more professional system, that details project milestones and holds money in escrow for projects requiring higher-value contributions. Hell, existing big name titles can pretty much do this already with pre-orders two years in advance.
You seem incredulous that "normal people" could generate enough money to fund game development. In practice, they already do - more than enough actually, as the publishers skim a sweet cut off the top before passing down what's left to the developers.
Oh yes, I'm glad that dangerous criminal was apprehended. He said something mean about somebody important, we can't let that stand. Now let's see them apply that law to all everyone else who gets offended on the internet, and see how fast the system gets choked up.
This story isn't about patents, even though the trials are. The things being exposed is exposing stuff like Apple's development methodology and advertising tactics. I guess it also goes to show that the secret to Apple's success isn't it's technological innovation, but it's marketing budget.
A trademark can only be enforced if it gets to court, and the "infringer" doesn't decide to drop the whole thing to avoid the possibility of a seven-digit lawsuit when they get a nastygram on an important letterhead,
Well, if they get a judge to agree that the little guys suit was frivolous, yeah. This legislation doesn't mandate loser pays, it gives judges the option to enforce loser pays if they determine that the plaintiff knew the suit was likely to lose when they brought it.
And if you reply by saying that the big corp will just buy out the judge too - well, there's your problem. No matter what legislation is passed, you can't have justice if the officers of the court are corrupt. That's not a problem with this legislation, it's a problem with the legal system as a whole.
They aren't. I have data to demonstrate this...I took my address book from that time and found the current location of everyone I knew in San Jose back then.
"The plural of anecdote is not data." - Roger Brinner
Design patents serve a somewhat useful purpose, although I think things like trademark and trade dress serve the purpose better. Just like utility patents, the problem isn't necessarily that they exist, but that USPTO is handing them out like candy. A deliberately minimalistic design with no distinguishing features other than its minimalism shouldn't qualify for a design patent, just as an extremely obvious patent that is just performing an existing operation on a new class of device shouldn't qualify for a utility patent.
Rather, Apple has sued Samsung for combining so many visual and behavioral elements from the iPhone and iPad that they have obviously ripped off the design.
Care to enumerate those visual elements? Because Apple's design patent (which I'm sick of linking to in these stories; you look it up) is extremely minimal, and contains very few distinctive visual elements.
Slashdot Mirror
The summary said "there hasn't been a single accident under computer control." If the car was stopped at lights, it was hardly under computer control, any more than it would've been had it been parked by the curb.
Are they doing the same thing they did when they said they broke the pre-order record? That is, counting all the copies of D3 they gave away to WoW subscribers who signed up to the Annual Pass as pre-orders. That's the only reason I have the game. I played it for maybe 2 weeks. Then it got old. I played D2 for years.
Quite the opposite. I wonder how many ex LendInkers, frustrated that their legitimate channel for sharing books was denied, threw their hands up in frustration, said "screw playing by their rules then", and took themselves away to the Pirate Bay.
Your fathers are Darwin award winners.
+1 Unwitting Stupidity
No, no, no, not enough suffixes. It should be believerists. Apparently, "deniers" wasn't perjorative enough, so you need to whack some extra letters on the end to make the term sound even more dramatic.
where you're destroying a resource
...which isn't yours, and you have no long term interest in
in exchange for a one-time benefit of briefly being faster than your competitors.
...during which period you made several hundred million dollars.
Tragedy of the commons
You do realize most games flop, right? For every Halo/Gears of War/Uncharted there's probably dozens others that fail to recoup their initial costs
No, those sort of "flops" will never get their initial funding, and thus will never get made. I'm sure people will fund games that fail to live up to expectations, but then, that happens with the traditional method too - after all, how many people purchased Daikatana?
It's a great way to ensure only popular crap gets published - endless Halo/Gears of War/Unchated/God of War/Tetris games that sell millions and make tons of profit
Yeah, because when you look at its track record that's what's been made - Shadowrun (turn-based RPG), Doublefine (Adventure Game), Banner Saga (old school hand-animated turn based combat). As opposed to the stuff the traditional publishing houses churn out.
Truth is - plenty of kickstarter projects fail. Plenty of game kickstarter projects fail to meet funding.
And, as you've said, plenty of commercial games are flops. Plenty don't get greenlit either, because some random executive doesn't get it.
Who exactly is going to be paying the game developers in this scenario?
The same people who do now - the end users.
And with what?
Uh, money?
You're suggesting the entire industry should be financed by Kickstarter
Or similar services. Kickstarter is good for indie projects - I imagine you'd need a more professional system, that details project milestones and holds money in escrow for projects requiring higher-value contributions. Hell, existing big name titles can pretty much do this already with pre-orders two years in advance.
You seem incredulous that "normal people" could generate enough money to fund game development. In practice, they already do - more than enough actually, as the publishers skim a sweet cut off the top before passing down what's left to the developers.
Oh yes, I'm glad that dangerous criminal was apprehended. He said something mean about somebody important, we can't let that stand. Now let's see them apply that law to all everyone else who gets offended on the internet, and see how fast the system gets choked up.
This story isn't about patents, even though the trials are. The things being exposed is exposing stuff like Apple's development methodology and advertising tactics. I guess it also goes to show that the secret to Apple's success isn't it's technological innovation, but it's marketing budget.
So the secret sauce I need to become a multibillion dollar multinational corporation is spend a lot on advertising
You had it in the first one. The rest is meaningless window-dressing.
It's called "-1, Overrated"
A trademark can only be enforced if it gets to court, and the "infringer" doesn't decide to drop the whole thing to avoid the possibility of a seven-digit lawsuit when they get a nastygram on an important letterhead,
So your tablet is usable (for input) when you turn it into a laptop. That's not really much of a defence of the tablet form-factor.
Well, if they get a judge to agree that the little guys suit was frivolous, yeah. This legislation doesn't mandate loser pays, it gives judges the option to enforce loser pays if they determine that the plaintiff knew the suit was likely to lose when they brought it.
And if you reply by saying that the big corp will just buy out the judge too - well, there's your problem. No matter what legislation is passed, you can't have justice if the officers of the court are corrupt. That's not a problem with this legislation, it's a problem with the legal system as a whole.
Yes. It was shorthand for "unintended double negative". I figured the context of me not reviewing my comment would be sufficient to imply that.
Urgh. Double negative. Teach me to rewrite a comment without re-reading it.
It is. Unless you haven't freely entered into a contract guaranteeing you won't do it.
The goggles, they do nothing
They aren't. I have data to demonstrate this...I took my address book from that time and found the current location of everyone I knew in San Jose back then.
"The plural of anecdote is not data."
- Roger Brinner
An anonymous coward provided this link further upthread:
Design patents serve a somewhat useful purpose, although I think things like trademark and trade dress serve the purpose better. Just like utility patents, the problem isn't necessarily that they exist, but that USPTO is handing them out like candy. A deliberately minimalistic design with no distinguishing features other than its minimalism shouldn't qualify for a design patent, just as an extremely obvious patent that is just performing an existing operation on a new class of device shouldn't qualify for a utility patent.
And the answer would be "no", and colleges would stop requiring high SATs in political science in their admission criteria...oh wait.
Not a parallel example.
Rather, Apple has sued Samsung for combining so many visual and behavioral elements from the iPhone and iPad that they have obviously ripped off the design.
Care to enumerate those visual elements? Because Apple's design patent (which I'm sick of linking to in these stories; you look it up) is extremely minimal, and contains very few distinctive visual elements.
Which is a good point, if the government is passing legislation forcing you keep your TV at the local electronics store.
Poor analogy is poor.