Creative Pressures id Software With Patents

Cryect writes "Earlier today it was announced by Creative that they would be adding in EAX 3D sound support to Doom 3, and that they had come to an 'agreement relating to Creative's patented shadowing technique [also known as Carmack's Reverse in some coding circles] and id's cutting-edge 3D graphics DOOM 3 engine.' This seemed somewhat suspicious, almost as if id was being pressured, and a quick email to John Carmack from Reverend @ Beyond3d got this reply: 'The patent situation well and truly sucks... It was tempting to take a stand and say that our products were never going to use any advanced Creative/3DLabs products because of their position on patenting gaming software algorithms, but that would only have hurt the users...' There's also some possible prior art [PPT link] to Creative Labs' patent, from a 1999 talk by Nvidia's Sim Dietrich."

Creative's job

Seems like creative makes a practice outta this. http://us.creative.com/corporate/investor/releases .asp?pid=6197 Creative Technology Ltd. (NASDAQ: CREAF), and wholly-owned subsidiary EMU, today announced a mixed jury verdict in the case against Aureal Semiconductor.

Ugh, I hate software patents.

This is a perfect example of why I really hate software patents. Company X will talk about something, hype it up, not mention a bloody patent, then when someone uses it, the company waits around until the opportune moment, then BAM!!!! pulls some patent infringment BS out of their bum.

It is not right. I understand the importance of patents outside of the software industry, I really do. I think that if someone comes up with a clever idea and makes a prototype and intends to sell said object, then they should have a grace period of how long they can be the only ones. I'm up for debate on how long this period should be, but still. In software this just does not happen. You have these companies that are entirely setup with a bunch of patents and they just sue other companies to make money. Talk about shaddy business.

Patent a way to click a button, or how a shadow is rendered, or something just as rediculous is wrong and should not be possible. It hurts the industry more then it helps anyone. It will be aweful to see the rest of the world pass us by because we are unable to innovate because of all the legal mess we have. We have no one to blame but ourselves though.

I hope all of this mess does not affect Doom 3 release date, and it is almost a shame ID did not stick it to Creative. It is nice to see a company care about the user for once to though.

Brendan

Dont worry!

Dont worry that US will be left behind - soon the rest of the world will also have the same stupid patent and DMCA-style laws that will stifle innovation and maybe seriously harm free software.

This because of different trade agreements where the US is a part (NAFTA, WTO, etc). (using trade as leverage). And also thanks to big companies doing massive lobbying for these kind of laws. We really dont have a good democracy anywhere in the world, since it is money = power.

I recommend everyone to see this movie:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0379225/

Re:Not just software patents

This is what really annoys me about this system and companies like Creative Labs (who haven't made an innovative product since the mid-90s). They simply buy up all sorts of technology (Aureal, Sensaura, EMU, Ensoniq, etc.) and slack off with their own products. Creative hasn't done anything substantial with their soundcards since the Live series was released (even then it was sub-par in terms of quality), and has simply re-released the same DSP with some pumped-up driver hacks and better codecs. It's no wonder that companies like M-Audio and Turtle Beach have produced sonically superior products for the average consumer.

Unfortunately, other areas of audio have suffered. There is no "OpenGL" of 3D audio because Creative owns all of the patents from its acquisition of companies like Aureal and Sensaura. They will always have the one-up on 3D audio performance over their customers, and any improvements will be at their own pace. PC audio has been so stale over the last few years. It's sad to see that it's come down to this, but literally; PC audio has gone virtually nowhere because of patent issues like this. This issue with their (stealing) patenting of Carmack's Reverse really shows why we are probably set-back several years in terms of a truly awesome 3D audio experience.

Re:Not just software patents

"There is no "OpenGL" of 3D audio because Creative owns all of the patents from its acquisition of companies like Aureal and Sensaura."

OpenAL? http://www.openal.org/

Re:Ugh, I hate software patents.

The problem is not the software patents, per se, but rather the length of time for which they endure. In an industry that changes dramatically from year to year with new technologies relying on the acceptance of older technologies, it would seem that keeping techniques and algorithms locked down for 17 years does more to hinder new advancements than to help.

A more reasonable term should be adopted for software patents say more on the order of 2 or 3 years. A lot of money can be made in that time frame giving enough insentive to develop without taking too much from the people whom these patents affect.

Re:Ugh, I hate software patents.

The problem is with the mere idea of patenting software. Software is protected by trade secrets and copyrights. Patents should apply to things, not virtual things. Hell, I'd like to see the end of patents altogether ( in their current form) - I hate the idea that it's first to the patent office who gets the monopoly. Independent works should also get protection because they put equally hard work into their invention too. As long as they didn't copy, then that would be fine by me.

Inventions are often hard, and really, if the invention is already out there, it's much cheaper to buy rather than re-invent, but if you put the effort into inventing parallel (or without any knowledge of) a patented invention, why should you not also get protection???

Re:Ugh, I hate software patents.

If so, then you wouldn't have to publically disclose the workings of your invention. Patents are to protect work that is publically disclose so the secrets of any invention don't get lost to society, and hence, after the patent expires, you can build upon that invention.

But patents rarely fully disclose exactly how the invention works, and as we know, the devil is in the detail. I think a lot of people skilled in a particular art would find it hard to re-create an invention from it's patent - indeed, there are many patents for things that do not work.

Patents are protection for ideas, but ideas are worthless when implementation is everything, which is certainly the case in software. Implementations are adequately protected by copyrights.

Patents may have meant something in the dim, dark past when people patented physical inventions that worked, but now....

Re:Ugh, I hate software patents.

A couple of things - use a spell checker before you send the letter...

From the creative web page:

Phil O'Shaughnessy

Director of Corporate Communications

[e-mail]

Lara B. Vacante

Public Relations Manager

[e-mail]

Jennifer Ellard

Senior Public Relations Specialist

[e-mail]

Katie Meyer

Public Relations Coordinator

[e-mail]

John, just do it!

...and it is almost a shame ID did not stick it to Creative...

Have to agree, I would love to see iD remove support for Creative soundcards, or at least offer enhanced sound support for any other brand. Maybe then the asshats over at CL will see what happens when you bite the hand that feeds.

I wonder which boardroom genius decided to threaten the company behind the most eagerly awaited game of all time, when game players are one of the biggest buyers of your products. Fuck Creative; I was looking to buy a new Audigy card this month, absolutely no chance now, I'm looking elsewhere...

Re:John, just do it!

haha, there's no other brand.

Nvidia Soundstorm. The Audio solution that comes with the Nforce2 MCP-T. And it's a Nvidia Product, So ID Getting full support From Nvidia would be easy as Pie since both companies like each other so much.

There's also VIA's Vinyl Audio Solution, as well as Analog Devices Soundmax.

patents

And the reason no games are released on time is that I hold the worldwide patent to releasing games on time.

Friend or Foe?

"The DOOM 3 engine ushers in a new rendering paradigm that allows id and our licensees to bring cinema quality visuals to game players in real time," said Todd Hollenshead, CEO of id Software. "We look forward to further enhancing players' audio experience by working with Creative to leverage their EAX ADVANCED HD audio technology in the DOOM 3 engine."

"Working together with id Software, an industry icon, provides Creative with an exciting opportunity to enhance one of the hottest game engines around," said Hock Leow, CTO of Creative Technology. "We look forward to the challenge of implementing EAX ADVANCED HD Multi-Environment technology within the Doom 3 engine, and subsequently working with id to make these enhancements available to their licensees. We are also pleased with the agreement relating to Creative's patented shadowing technique and id's cutting-edge 3D graphics DOOM 3 engine."

Hmm, this press release seems rather pleasant in tone. I don't get the impression that they were coerced into anything. When I check id's website [idsoftware.com] though I don't find the press release on the front page, nor do I see Creative listed in their "Friends of id" section [idsoftware.com]. Perhaps they are just a bit behind on updating their website while working to release Doom 3 on time?

Surprise?

Hmm, this press release seems rather pleasant in tone.

Is a press release ever NOT pleasant in tone? Of course it's pleasant; if id is being legally pursued by Creative they wouldn't print a press release saying, "Creative can blow." That kind of talk is saved for plan files, not press releases.

but PCG said.......

and i quote from PC Gamer:
(pg.79) Sept. 2004
"(8) Is it true that Doom 3's audio engine is entirely CPU-dependent, thus negating the benefits of high-end sound cards? If so, what are the benefits? What are the drawbacks?
[bla, bla, bla]
PC Gamer's take: Much to Creative Labs' chagrin, Doom 3 should sound exactly the same (and perform equally well) on your motherboard's built-in audio processor as it will on a high-end Audigy 2 ZS sound card."

so much for that!

If Carmack won't take a stand, who will?

We were prepared to use a two-pass algorithm that gave equivalent results at a speed hit, but we negotiated the deal with Creative so that we were able to use the zfail method without having to actually pay any cash. It was tempting to take a stand and say that our products were never going to use any advanced Creative/3dlabs products because of their position on patenting gaming software algorithms, but that would only have hurt the users.

Sadly, if Mr. Carmack won't take a stand against evil software patents, I doubt anybody will, or will at least do so successfully.

Think about it. John Carmack has influence and money. People will continue to buy the games id makes, whether or not they use this patented technology. Sure, they might be slightly slower, but considering all the other optimizations id is famous for, it's unlikely anybody would notice.

If a free software project wanted to challenge a patent like this, it wouldn't stand a chance. With no money, it couldn't defend itself. From the other side, the companies that have more power than id simply don't care to take a stand on issues like this.

I can't help but feel that Mr. Carmack wimped out of this fight. Saying that it hurts gameply is just an easy out. Would people really have noticed?

Maybe it's not too late. Maybe if enough people speak up about this, either id will decide to reverse their decision, or Creative will back down and make their patent available royalty-free.

Re:If Carmack won't take a stand, who will?

id Software it's one of the latest small developers in the field. Pretty much everyone else (besides Epic maybe), is owned by the big game publishers. id is still independent. They don't have the financiar muscle of Creative. They did the only intelligent move, let Creative babble about their collaboration in a *sigh* nicely made press release. Let's try not to get the wrong picture here: id are the good guys, Creative the bad ones.

Re:If Carmack won't take a stand, who will?

Sure, they might be slightly slower, but considering all the other optimizations id is famous for, it's unlikely anybody would notice.

Are you kidding me?

Gamers will spend $400 on a video card, more than it would cost to buy an Xbox AND a PS2, in hopes of getting an extra handful of fps in 3D Shooter Game #837.

Prior art

Prior art from a talk on the technique [gamedev.net]


Reply Quoting This MessageEdit Message SimmerD Member since: 1/5/2003
Posted - 9/21/2003 6:50:03 PM

Don't worry about it fellas. I described this technique publicly a few months before they filed the patent - hence Prior Art. Ironically, it was at a Creative Labs developer's forum.

During my stencil buffer talk, I described doing shadow volumes the 'reverse' way. At the time, I didn't realize the major reason why the z fail method is better than the z pass method, although I did realize they were logically equivalent, which is why it's now known as 'Carmack's Reverse' and not 'Dietrich's Reverse'!

Too bad...

Too bad a couple months doesn't cut the mustard. To have truly solid prior art, it has to be over a year before the patent was filed in the U.S. Otherwise, the inventor can swear behind the disclosure, saying that they invented it before the disclosure occurred. This is not the case in the EU. There, disclosure destroys patent rights.

-truth

Re:Prior art

For something other than another patent to be considered prior art, you must look at 35 USC 102(a)-
a person shall be entitled to a patent unless -
(a) the invention was known or used by others in this country, or patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country, before the invention thereof by the applicant for a patent.

It is difficult to prove "known", however the talk could be considered a printed publication if it was readily accessable to the public. A paper which is orally presented in a forum open to all interested persons constitutes a "printed publication" if written copies are freely disseminated. Massachusetts Institute of Technology v. AB Fortia, 774 F.2d 1104, 1109. Also see MPEP 2128,2132

Re:Prior art

Describing it in public before the patent application date is not prior art per se. IANL, but for it to be public I am pretty sure one has to show that it was public before the date of invention - which can preceed the date of filing by many years.

Future source code release.

id Software has faithfully released the full source code to each of their titles once the game is a couple generations old.

I wonder if this will affect the release of the Doom 3 source a few years from now? Can patented code be released under the GPL?

Dan East

Re:Future source code release.

iD has in the past ripped out sound code that was licensed from 3rd parties. Or John has quickly put something else together that will work to replace 3rd party code.

This was done w/ Doom.

well then...

"would only have hurt the users..."

Creatives drivers for SB (Live or whatever) always caused only headache on multiprocessor machines. I realized how limited (and poorly writen) their drivers are after switched to kX drivers. Now marketing dep @ creative reached total lows ...

I dunno about rest of the /. croud, but I hear you John. My next rig will have no Creative products in it.

Slightly OT: Software patent question

Does slashdot have a patent on "a method of buring the retinas of web site viewers with godawful color schemes"?

This color scheme is worse than the IT section's!

The sad part is EAX sucks compared to Aureal

The EAX environmental audio is lame compared to the Aureal environmental audio. So naturally the worst standard won in the marketplace and the best standard was purchased and buried.

Creative Labs sucks. Their sound cards have stability problems and EAX buring Aureal really pisses me off.

Ask Slashdot

Todays question is -- How Important is Creative?

My own take: Not very. They're about the only game in town when it comes to fancy-pants gaming sound cards. The thing is that a fancy pants gaming soundcard is not very important to me. Don't get me wrong I'm a pretty big gamer, but who really wants a computer desk coverd with a dozen speakers and the attendant wires? I haven't had a creative soundcard since the early soundblaster days. Creative products apart from soundcards? They just re-badge other people's stuff. I'd consider the RIO mp-3 players, but rio isn't creative anymore, right? I haven't had anything from creative in years, and I haven't missed it. Even as a computer gamer. The $20-$30 econo soundboard has been fine for me for as long as I can remember. I think my 486 might have had a creative board. Maybe.

What do you guys think? When you're putting together a setup what do you think about when it comes to soundboards? Do you have to have the best one? How much do you usually spend? Do you really love the 3d sound? Have you GOTTA have the latest pimptastic creative soundboard for like $250? Some people need super awsome soundboards because they make computer music, but then the creative boards aren't the ones you want anyway, right?

While the fury of /. is intense it is also generally short lived. But ditching creative products is not a difficult proposition. And ever since I heard about how they bragged that they could keep costs down by holding back innovation (this was back in the aureal days) I've always kinda thought they were a bunch of dickheads.

Will Carmack change his mind about patents?

In "Masters of Doom" Carmack stated, either naively or bravely, that he refuses to file patents for his work as such information should not be locked away but should be free.

Now that he's been burned, I wonder if he'll start filing them as preemptive measures. I hate software patents, but I would if I were him.

Re:Will Carmack change his mind about patents?

Besides, if he codes a technique before someone patents it then any future patent would be invalid due to his prior art.

If they filed for the patent within one year of the release of the technique, then they could patent it. Yes, with our system, someone can invent something, decide not to patent it in order to let others use it, someone else can see the invention, patent it, and force the original inventor to pay to use it.

Source code to Doom3?

Carmack usually allows access to the source code of his games after their markets have dried up. I wonder how this patent will effect that? Time will tell.

Man, it'd suck spending years writing a game engine from scratch, then having some numb-nut lawyer tell me that someone else owns a part of it.

And I am a numb-nut lawyer!

The consequences of two fundamental problems

1. The legal system biases "justice" toward those with money more than those with creative skills.
2. Patents depend on the legal system.

Ergo those with creative skills are deprived of the money needed to pursue, not only their rights to more money, but are deprived of the money needed to pursue creations that require money (since the people expert at acquiring money rarely possess the insight necessary to understand the distinction between genuinely creative enterprise and some sort of false inspiration).

W. D. Hamilton wrote [geocities.com] of this sort of thing as being the down-fall of civilizations:

The incursions of barbaric pastoralists seem to do civilizations less harm in the long run than one might expect. Indeed, two dark ages and renaissances in Europe suggest a recurring pattern in which a renaissance follows an incursion by about 800 years. It may even be suggested that certain genes or traditions of pastoralists revitalize the conquered people with an ingredient of progress which tends to die out in a large panmictic population for the reasons already discussed. I have in mind altruism itself, or the part of the altruism which is perhaps better described as self-sacrificial daring. By the time of the renaissance it may be that the mixing of genes and cultures (or of cultures alone if these are the only vehicles, which I doubt) has continued long enough to bring the old mercantile thoughtfulness and the infused daring into conjunction in a few individuals who then find courage for all kinds of inventive innovation against the resistance of established thought and practice. Often, however, the cost in fitness of such altruism and sublimated pugnacity to the individuals concerned is by no means metaphorical, and the benefits to fitness, such as they are, go to a mass of individuals whose genetic correlation with the innovator must be slight indeed. Thus civilization probably slowly reduces its altruism of all kinds, including the kinds needed for cultural creativity (see also Eshel 1972). /blockquote

I stab at thee

Could this be an attempt to stay competitive now that Intel's High Definition Audio [intel.com] is coming?

With this advanced audio appearing on most of Intel's new boards, it would seem to me that Creative's market is disappearing.

Thin end of the wedge...

Shadowing is just the start, taken to it's logical conclusion patents are going to be filed covering every aspect of a game - from it's graphics through to it's gameplay and UI.

In the end an independent developer is going to be unable to work without spending more money on lawyers and licenses than on creating the game itself. The horror...the horror...

Creative support sucks

their products are shoddy and their performance poor. EAX has always been a DOG of a performer and truly hoses simple echo sounding.

Creative Labs, please die.

What is company in this day and age to do when faced with a much smaller competitor who with superior technology to their own. Go back to the drawing board and design better products for your customers? Perhaps reduce your prices or launch an advertising campaign? No, the answer is of course to sue them.

This is exactly what Creative did to Aureal. A3D 3.0 was to be a revolution in positional audio. Creative knew they were a threat and also knew that they did not have the means to survive a drawn out legal battle. They also put pressure on soundcard makers not to produce Vortex 2 cards under the suggestion that they might be liable for patent infrigement (does all of this sound familiar?). After Aureal's demise Creative bought their IP and now A3D 3.0 lies dormant in Craptive's vaults and will never see the light of day, instead we're left with the glorified reverb engine that is EAX.

So these latest shenanigans by Craptive don't surprise me one bit.

I why I hate, why I use Creative's cards...

I hate Creative as a company. A few years back it decided not to host any drivers or software on its US servers. It stated, believe it or not, that in fairness to those without broadband access, it was better to charge EVERYONE to buy and mail CDs with the latest drivers.

That ploy didn't work as everyone simply used servers in Europe or Asia to download the drivers and software.

But still to this day you need the original driver off the CD that came with your hardware. If you try to use the latest downloaded drivers, they'll tell you that there is no Creative hardware installed.

What purpose does this serve? I've bought the hardware, they have my money, why be stingy with the drivers? Every other hardware manufacture lets me simply use the latest drivers WITHOUT installing the old drivers first.

Why do I still use Creative's audio cards? Normalization. It's a feature buried in Creative's EAX, but it makes all MP3s (actually all sound files) the same volume. Thus, every computer in my house has a Creative card in it so I can access my MP3 collection from any where in the house.

Does any other sound card maker have a feature similar to Creative's normalization? Or did Creative patent that too?

Re:I why I hate, why I use Creative's cards...

I deal with the same problem. I have an Audigy Deluxe, and an older driver disc (doesn't have drivers for Windows XP on it) -- if I just install the card, and go to Creative's "Auto Update", it wants to only install the bare minimum drivers. No options to install the other apps (taskbar/remote control/speaker setup/etc.) -- what the crap?

Also, digging around the site, if you do find one of those other programs to download.. when you try to run them, they say they can't find an older version to update and force you to quit.

As for normalization, I wouldn't leave that up to your soundcard. Use a decent audio player like FooBar2000, and set replaygain levels on your tracks. Enjoy the stability.

Or, if you want, buy the OctiMax plugin for Winamp2/5.. it's a multiband compressor/limiter, and does a pretty good job at keeping things steady. I use it for radio broadcasts, or LAN parties.

MP3Gain

Better link for MP3 normalisation

• MP3Gain at Sourceforge" [sourceforge.net]

Cheers,
Toby Haynes

I really am not a fan of software patents

I think Doom 3 is going to drive many many pc upgrades. If I were in a vindictive mood (which I obviously am right now), I would leave creative completely out of the game- no support at all, ever. Everyone would suffer, but I think in this case creative would suffer the most.

Doesn't this help validate Creative's patent?

I wish that id HAD taken a stand. They said that they didn't want to hurt gamers and the industry, but to me, this seems to hurt more. This helps establish that what Creative did was okay as it worked out for them. If id had refused to use their patent, then Creative gains nothing from it, and might be discouraged from trying this BS tactic in the future.

Do we need Creative any more?

Modern motherboards contain on-board sound -- many of which are 5.1 or greater with digital S/P DIF connectors. With all the hoopla over Doom 3 hardware requirements I couldn't find any major ([H]ardOCP, Tom's Hardware, etc.) sites listing audio benchmarks or quality comparisons pitting on-board sound and cards like the Creative Z2 series.

I'm not an audiophile, but for games like Doom 3 etc. if a motherboard already supports digital 5.1 (or greater) is it really necessary to go out and purchase a Creative card? Will said on-board audio provide sufficient quality for 5.1+ gaming? I'm building a gaming system to replace my aging first-generation Athlon and am not sure whether or not I should throw a sound card in the mix, too.

Carmack's love for Creative goes way back...

This reminds me of a story that floated around Creative while I was working there ('93-'96), and it was about how this little independant game developer had approached Creative for some development support with their sound cards. This was '91-'92 time frame. Anyways, the guy called up asking for some help, and pretty much got the shaft. He wasn't a licensed developer, and didn't want to pay the huge amount Creative was asking for at the time.

Some harsh words were exchanged, and the guy basically told Creative to go F themselves. Not long after the guy releases Doom and the rest is history.

Creative changed their policy shortly thereafter and created a developer support department to help out the small developers. A little too late, IMO.

But the real clincher was when Creative launched their new product at the time, the AWE32, with loadable Soundfont technology. iD was getting close to releasing Quake, and Creative really wanted to get iD to support their new technology.

But Carmack, remember how he was so fondly treated, and basically told Creative to suck it, again, and Quake was released without AWE32 support.

The AWE32 never really took off, and neither did their Soundfont technology.

So I am a bit suprised that Carmack agreed to use their technology, but it does show everyone where his alliances lie. To the fan and consumer.

Kudos to Carmack.

Anyways, goes on to prove, that the toes you step on today, may belong to the ass you have to kiss tomorrow.

Kind Herb

"Whether you suffer from glaucoma, or you just rented The Matrix,
medical marijuana can make things fabulous, medically!"

-- Homer J. Simpson

Creative is far from it

I dislike Creative products. I used to like them, when the PC gaming world was new and their hardware worked. Nowdays, I have more problems with Creative than with anything else in my systems. The Creative cards cause the driver crashes. The Creative cards are the reason some games don't work. The Creative cards are the first things to fail in my systems. Why should I like them?

Am i mistaken...

...or wasn't the D3 engine supposed to do all audio processing on the CPU rather than the soundcard? Lately, the only advantage Creative had over other soundcards was hardware EAX support; i can live without it. That's good, because on modern processors the CPU usage hit is minimal and ensures the engine will sound the same everywhere.

If the only reason they decided to do otherwise is because of a bogus patent, i'm not buying Creative hardware anymore. There are better quality (and cheaper) soundcards out there. Hell, even my integrated SiS audio sounds quite good.

Might a boycott actually work here?

Yeah, yeah. The usual smoke-blowing.

But...

* Doom3 is about to ship. A LOT of people will be buying nice new high-profit-margin gaming kit right about now.

* There's a large overlap between the FPS-gaming set and the patent-hating Slashdot set. This isn't like GIFs, where 99.999% of end-users didn't give a damn about patent abuse.

Recommended alternate sound cards?

Can anyone recommend any alternative sound cards for gaming and/or general use other than Creative's cards? Or perhaps a sound card review site?

innovation through litigation

I installed my last creative card into a machine close to two years ago, and remembering the absolute HELL of installing their driver set, I vowed never to even insert another CD with the "creative" logo on it in a computer.

After installing a reasonably good Asus motherboard in my latest gaming rig, I figured I'd live with the on-board audio (which I assumed to be a piece of crap) because the extra $150 or so for an ub3r SB card would have stretched my toy budget.

Ya know what? The onboard 5.1 sound (by some quasi-generic manufacturer) works quite well, rendering the positional audio of games without killing the CPU, and it handles both stereo and surround sound nicely. I've got both digital and analog in/outs, headphone jack (without the trademark Creative crappy-ground-whining-noise)..

So I can live with a perfectly useable solution and spend the $150 on new clothes for the kids - or something *really* important - like a new Dremel.

Or, I can shell out $150 for a sound card that doesn't really give me anything new, plays havoc with my hardware, and installs 80 varieries of spamware on my PC before crashing it.. Gee, let me think.... I'll skip the SCO.. I mean, Creative, hardware.

my letter to creative public relations

[e-mail] (public relations)

I'm just writing to inform you that you will not receive anymore of my business regarding your position on gaming software algorithms patents. I have canceled my order for the Maximum-power 6.1 sound system and will take my business elsewhere. I have supported Creative since I first got my computer, but I do not approve of this disregard for gamers and I'm quite saddened by your position.

onboard sound...

I know little to nothing about sound cards, but I just got a new system that has 5.1 channel (and a digital out) right onboard.

+ 50$ for some speakers and I am all set - I know it's not 6.1 but is there a realy big difference? Why should I shell out $$ for a sound card when out-of-the-box I get theater quality sound.

John Carmack stick it to Creative!

Screw them. We will still buy your game.
Creative is crap. Crappy products, crappy drivers, crappy support. In fact, I've heard that some of their drivers aren't even downloadable anymore.

Please please please go back on your decision and go with your CPU based audio instead of their crap.

I pledge to buy two copies if you'll do this, otherwise I'm only buying one!

The official NA press realease

http://www.nintendo.com/newsarticle?articleid=02f7 3c08-f36d-403c-a017-ab1dc6fab277

The Patent

The Patent [uspto.gov]

This was approved in 2002, but filed in 1999...that would make prior art difficult to find. It is quite specific, and mentions real-time shadows in a time before they were really around - certainly Doom 3 hadn't been acnnounced.

Don't get me wrong, I still hate Creative's tactics, and I wrote them an email telling them so. Why the hell does Creative have this patent, of all companies? I mean, nVidia, ATI, Intel even I could see, but Creative??

We need to banish software patents, or come up with something that works better than this mess.

What a shame...

I guess my Turtle Beach Santa Cruz is going to have to last a few more years. Scratch me buying anything from Creative Labs.

(Nevermind that I bought the Santa Cruz specifically because I think Creative Labs makes shitty products.)

any alternatives to creative?

given this (and the fact that creative drivers suck) I think my next rig (for the first time since my first ever PC way back when, who had an (original) sb card, don't even want to think how much I paid for it) will NOT have an SB sound card inside.

My requirements are simple

1- must not be a CPU hog in games (aka, must have hw mixing acceleration and DirectAudio hw support)
2- don't care about positional audio at all
3- and here's the kicker: must have some sort of easily available midi in-out connection

1 and 2 should not be too hard to find (most onboard audio have it I think), but 3 has been stumping me for a while (for example the m-audio 2496 has midi in/out but according to posts I've read is kind of a CPU hog for games). Maybe I should just use the onboard audio of whatever new mobo I get and buy a midi card?

No more Creative products for me!

Well I have to say that I strongly dislike atrongarm tactics like this and will never buy a Creative product again.

I'm only too happy to mention that I just built myself a whole new gaming rig and it doesn't have one single Creative product in it. :)

All i have to say is

why do software companies use eax in the first place

there is a standard that works very well when implemented has superb postioning and has been around for years

its called dolby digital

what is causing the problems with dolby digital not being an accepted standard ?

in my opinon a dolby digital setup will always best creatives reverb crap and ill never understand why companies feel they have to include eax support in there games. when there is a better standard available

Derek Smart, PhD: "software patents are necessary"

Via the aforementioned forum message link [beyond3d.com]:

I know its hard for some people to understand the viability of software patents and why they are necessary

Yes, it's difficult for me to justify patenting the intangible. I find it equally laborious equating copyright infringement with theft.

And for the sake of adding fuel to the fire, I present you this:

Yeah, most core Linux distros - for the most part - suck; and simply because a bunch of incompetent assholes decided they were going to delve in and piss around with it just because it was free.

I'll think I'll allow some of you Linux guys handle that one for me as I'm, admittedly, more of a Windows dweeb.

Countdown to Derek Smart, Ph.D. responding to this post with expletives in 5...4...3...

This is a shock and a little bit scary to

I didn't know such thing was possible. It seems software companies are patenting things left and right and it doesn't seem right. John Carmack and Id can't even stand up to guys like this. Come on John fight it. I'll wait and as a game fan support Id and others who stand up against such blatant greed. Just let us know how to help. I will not be buying stuff from Creative ever again to send a message.

Regards,
Ray

I am not a graphics wonk

Why doesn't one just test to see if the eye is in shadow, and if it is, add 1? Equivalently, one could have an extremely small region around the eye which is not in shadow, too small to affect anything else, but it should make the z-pass come out ok. Or am I missing something?

Email Addresses to Voice Your Opinion

Phil O'Shaughnessy
Director of Corporate Communications
[e-mail]

Lara B. Vacante
Public Relations Manager
[e-mail]

Jennifer Ellard
Senior Public Relations Specialist
[e-mail]

Katie Meyer
Public Relations Coordinator
[e-mail]

What alternatives?

What non-Creative alternatives are there to Creative SBLive! that are answer the following:

* must run in Linux/x86
* have native support in OpenAL (for 3D positioning)
* optionally have good wavetable synthesis

If there are other perks I'm missing, please suggest those as well.

another reason...

for me to never buy a not so creative Creative product again, to add to the list, next to unstable, bloated drivers, crappy sounding, slow performance.

I try never to buy, sell, or build systems with parts from unethical companies. Creative just made the list.

playing with fire...

I've been a purchaser of Creative Labs sound cards since the SoundBlaster16, with the exception of a foray into Diamond's Monster Sound 3D II MX300 due to A3D 2.0 and it's support in Half-Life.

I admire the folks at id Software, for all the usual reasons. I have no problem with any company contacting id Software and requesting that their proprietary technology is supported to improve a game. What I thoroughly dislike is the concept of software patents. What I dislike even more is the use of software patents as leverage. What frankly pisses me off is someone using software patents to threaten a company like id Software, who selflessly contribute a ridiculous amount to the development of computing, both directly in releasing unpatented software and indirectly by driving the take-up of new hardware and software technologies in their games. Doubly so when it's a distinctly uninnovative company like Creative Labs.

The only way a regular gamer like myself can punish a company is by refusing to buy it's products.

Are there any credible gamer-centric alternatives to Creative Labs' products?

I will be doing some research now, and if there are, CL will have just lost a customer. I have no problem with throwing a few hundred dollars in a different direction every year or three. Hell, I'd even be willing to donate money to id to have them say "see you in court" to the spineless worms.

you kids amaze me...

every manufacturer under the sun is the devil incarnate for not including drivers and support for linux (nevermind whether an economic proposition exists for supporting their products in linux),

but when it comes to patents, our beloved carmack should take a stand based on principle and

NOT SUPPORT HARDWARE?!?

heh. so no support for linux is heinous, but no support for everything is alright?

Next id-Game

No Creative at all! Fight the patent, design a new algorithm.
Whatever, just stick it to Creative next time.

Re:If I was Carmack....

Appealing in some ways, but Carmack won't do that, as illustrated by his words, that you don't even need to read the article to find:

'It was tempting to take a stand...but that would only have hurt the users...'

Re:Don't support single vendors

There's a difference between joint marketing ("The Way It's Meant To Be Played") and blackmail.

Historical precedent

The irony in a company named Creative holding a software patent from which they have never created anything is just amazing.

Anyhow, there is precedent for this type of stupidity. Believe it or not the American car manufacturers at one time paid a patent holding company for every car they sold. Ford challenged the patent and the court ordered the holding company to build the car for which they held the patent on. Needless to say the car was a dismal failure and the patent was overturned in 1911.

http://inventors.about.com/library/weekly/aacarsse ldona.htm [about.com]

burnin

Re:Funny with doom

Using someone else's code?

I can write all the code I want and it's mine... however if I do things with the code which violate existing patents I can get into trouble, even though the code it's self is mine.

That is often the problem with software patents, that a patent is granted in the loose steps of doing something, there are many ways code can be written to do the same thing, but many are covered by the patent, regardless of who writes the code or for what.

Re:If I was Carmack....

I would just put a little bit of code to detect if a Creative card was installed, and if so, maybe cap the FPS at 10 or so. And also provide a splash screen that explains in tech-jargon "Doom 3 is not optimized for Creative products. Please try a Hercules or Santa Cruz Card." That could signifigantly hurt Creative's business.

No that would just cause owners of creative cards to get pissed of with id. Creative has a slightly higher market dominance then Doom 3 does ;)

Re:If I was Carmack....

In addition, let's say you have an onboard sound chip that is creative, that you have turned on in the bios to use something akin to TeamSpeak, but use a Santa Cruz for the game.

You'd have to check which card you're using, not just blindly screwing people who have a Creative chip hooked up to their PCI bus....

All in all, more problems than it solves.

Re:Thanks id.

Agreed. I'm building a new system for this, and other upcoming games. I know a lot of people that are doing the same. Creative just lost my money.

Re:Thanks id.

yea, serisouly. I feel bad having a creative card right now. Well, if i need a new machine to play DOOM 3, or whenever I need a new machine, creative's not getting my money. When companies use patents in assinine ways, they should be challenged. I kind of hope this pushes back the release date so that Creative suffers the wrath of DOOM {fans}.

Re:so Carmack caved

He had to cave. Creative brought this so late in the game that Doom 3 would have been delayed, and that costs lots of money. It's extortion. Creative said, "Play my game, or you'll be late."

Are you kidding?

All Carmack had to do was to add "Sorry, Doom 3 is cancelled because Creative Labs won't let us use their patented algorithims" to his .plan file.

Of course, this would have constituted conspiracy to commit murder in some jurisdiction or other, because if he had done so he'd know damn well that every CL executive would have been found dead in their beds the next morning.

Messily dead too. :D

Re:If I was Carmack....

And if Microsoft got caught adding code to hinder compatibility with third party programs (I don't really know if they actually did this), everyone on /. would get up in arms. No double standard here. I think Mr. Carmack is a little more mature than that.

Re:so Carmack caved

What? Carmack doesn't work for you...he isn't somehow responsible to fight the fight that you would. Why should he suffer losses because *you* think it's right to not ship Doom 3? You should just upgrade as planned and NOT buy a creative card. As was said earlier...don't get this backwards: Creative did the wrong thing, and Mr. Carmack is the good guy.

Re:If I was Carmack....

i had a problem in battlefield when it first came out, that made the game run at 0.5 FPS with hardware accelerated audio enabled on my nVidia SoundStorm. i wouldnt be suprised if it was on purpose, considering, i got around 60+ FPS with the acceleration DISABLED.

Troll Warning. Troll Warning.

WHBT. Looks like BigChigger is a known troll already [slashdot.org], too. Lame attempt though.

Re:so Carmack caved

You missed the big part. They patented the method DooM 3 uses for handling shadows. Creative patented a graphical technique, and are now using that patent to force ID endorsement. This want a case of him caving-in to support them, he caved because he felt the game just wouldn't be the same if he had to take-out all the shadows in the game. Personally, I'd rather he said "See you in court then, bitches." and put a portion of the DooM3 take into a legal defense fund for whomping on Creative, but I won't fault him for trying to keep litigation down.