Paltalk Launches New Lawsuit Against MMOG Makers

brewbeard

New member
Nov 29, 2007
141
0
0
Just like Microsoft having motion controls before 1999, didn't RogerWilco come before this load of bollocks?
 

Ickorus

New member
Mar 9, 2009
2,887
0
0
I hope something very bad happens to the PalTalk CEO.

Patent laws need to be seriously changed, lawsuits like this go against everything the patent laws are there for.
 

toapat

New member
Mar 28, 2009
899
0
0
Paltalk is fucked in this case. maybe if they hadnt declared blizzard as in the scope, but because they are suing the largest game company on earth, they are fucked.

if they win, which they have no chance in hell to, they are going to sue the internet for using their software

NCsoft, the second richest of these named companies is going to die anyway. there is no way in hell they arent fucked

Turbine has Wizards of the Coast (and the funding of the largest game on the planet) on their side.

Activition has landfills of cash. they dont care how many lawsuits they get hit with, they can just hire 20 times the number of lawyers that you do, all of equal or superior skill.

Sony has games that are older then those patents, rendering them immune.
 

cleverlymadeup

New member
Mar 7, 2008
5,256
0
0
GyroCaptain said:
I hate patent campers.
cleverlymadeup said:
it would be nice if someone found previous art and issued a patent challenge
That would be nice, but I suspect MS tried that already. And really, for something so ludicrously simple, the prior art could readily not exist in patent form, which is the easy way to prove its existence.

The whole thing reminds me of the frivolous patents like the one for the combover, only turned evil.
actually after seeing the patent, on /. there is a lot of prior art for this patent and it can be challenged and probly tossed out. basically any multiplayer tcp/ip game from before feb 1 96 would invalidate this, they just need to use a server and i think a MUD would actually do exactly what the patent is claiming

m$ just paid them off cause it was cheaper than going to court.