Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Patents Role Playing (Games) The Courts Games

Zynga and Blizzard Sued Over Game Patent 179

eldavojohn writes "Thinking about developing a game involving a 'database driven online distributed tournament system?' Well, you had better talk to Walker Digital or risk a lawsuit, because Walker Digital claims to have patented that 'invention' back in 2002. The patent in question has resulted in some legal matters for the makers of 'Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1 and 2, Call of Duty: Black Ops, Call of Duty: World at War, Blur, Wolfenstein, DJ Hero 2, Golden Eye 007, World of Warcraft and its expansions, Mafia Wars, and many others.' Walker Digital (parent company of Priceline.com) said it's not sure how much damages are going to be, and requested that through discovery in the court. If you think Walker Digital is not a patent troll, check out their lawsuit from two months ago against Facebook for using privacy controls Walker Digital claims to have patented. It would seem that any online competitive game that uses a database to select and reward contestants in a tournament could potentially fall under this patent — of course, those with the deepest coffers will be cherrypicked first."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Zynga and Blizzard Sued Over Game Patent

Comments Filter:
  • Patents (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ledow ( 319597 ) on Thursday January 06, 2011 @07:35AM (#34774828) Homepage

    And this is the problem with even doing business in a country that allows such abstract "patents", especially software patents. You don't need to be in the patent business, or invention, or even be in an area where you expect to have to research patents for running a business, and you don't even need to actually violate any valid patent - you can still sued out of existence if you're not big enough to fend such things off.

    It's not the "yet-another-big-company-sued-for-obviousness" stories that are the problem - how many tiny little outfits just settled out of court instead of fight something they *know* they should win? You don't point at Google first, you take lots of small companies and get their settlements in order to provide you with some authenticity and then go for the big boys, and you'll never hear about those small-fry that feel they have to pay up because it's too costly for them to annoy the patent-holders or defend against them in court.

    Seriously - stop doing business in places that have software patents. It's a gamble that is going to cost you big if you are unlucky enough to step on a patent-troll's foot. I hereby patent "method to determine if a user of a game is in a country subject to software patent laws for the purpose of denial of access to such users", by the way.

  • by Mindcontrolled ( 1388007 ) on Thursday January 06, 2011 @09:43AM (#34775418)
    I am writing patent applications for a living. Contrary to the popular slashdot meme, vagueness is not the slightest bit desirable in a well written patent. The objective is twofold: be as precise as possible, because vagueness will bit you in the arse in court, and cover as much ground as possible, to give the inventor the broadest protection you can get for him. Now, there's no doubt that there are a lot of shitty patents out there, especially in the field of software, and most especially in the USA. This however does not generalize to the whole field. I have the fortune of working in Europe, where our examiners would kick us out of the building with some of the shit that flies in the US - and actually they do, if we are unlucky enough to get a client who wants his US patent extended to the EU.

All seems condemned in the long run to approximate a state akin to Gaussian noise. -- James Martin

Working...