• Buttons@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    182
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Patents and video games huh? We can’t ignore what John Carmack had to say about this:

    The idea that I can be presented with a problem, set out to logically solve it with the tools at hand, and wind up with a program that could not be legally used because someone else followed the same logical steps some years ago and filed for a patent on it is horrifying.

    –John Carmack

    • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      2 months ago

      More like he wouldn’t be able to sell his solution to others, but yeah I think Patents on simple processes and mechanisms are dumb, especially certain software and firmware.

      • BigPotato@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        33
        ·
        2 months ago

        Imagine if you had a hammer and decided to use it to hit a nail and then someone came along and said “I see you’re using my method to build a house! Pay up!”

        Well, you can’t patent something like that!

        Imagine you open up a game engine, any engine, and decide you need to point to an objective so you decide to use an arrow. A game company says “You’re using our method to identify objectives! Pay up!” and that one is a unique mechanic?

        How long has humanity been using arrows to point to things? How can you patent it just because it’s a digital arrow?

            • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              No, the very premise of that user’s analogy is that he isn’t profiting from it. If somebody invented hammering nails literally this year and a company came in selling it as a product without permission, then it would be comparable. It reads as if he failed to read my comment entirely but still replied with multiple paragraphs.

              The game development analogy is better, floating arrows about characters heads was actually patented, but it was widely criticized and it expired in 2019. Plus I already took offense to simple mechanisms and especially certain software and firmware solutions.

              • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                14
                ·
                2 months ago

                A patient on hitting a nail with hammer is ridiculous if it’s your framing or theirs.

                • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  Countless buildings would never be built if you didnt invent hammer and nails, being paid royalties for a few years by large businesses who make use of it seems pretty fair.

          • BigPotato@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            2 months ago

            The ludicrousness is the point. “Capture a creature in a ball”… How close is that to Red Dead’s lasso? Could Nintendo patent capturing a creature with a rope? Does anyone hold that patent yet? No, it would be silly to try to patent something like that - yet at one point I’m certain it was someone’s “technique” while everyone else was jumping on the horses back like Breath of the Wild.

            • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago
              1. This thread started with a general statement about patent laws with a glaring innacuracy that it applied to noncommercial applications and in perpetuity. That is what I argued against. I fully support PalWorld.

              2. If that were Nintendo’s justification they would lose instantly. You can patent and/or claim intellectual property for very specific named designs, but you cannot do so for vague narrative concepts. Example: PokeBalls in various colorschemes is a go, but “a ball that capture creatures” is not good enough to patent.

          • webadict@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            Hey man, I’m future you. I here to give past me a warning. You keep looking like a complete fool and when you look for evidence to support your false claims, it turns out you were wrong the whole time, so you built a time machine to stop yourself. Anyway, the warning is to only use 1.11 Jiggawatts, as you miss the return time to stop yourself from looking foolish by about a day. Good luck!

            • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 months ago

              Hey, further future you, due to the nature of paradoxes your specific version doesn’t exist as a result of this timeline; and thank fuck for that because you’re a total loser.

    • Cock_Inspecting_Asexual@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      > The idea that I can be presented with a problem, set out to logically solve it with the tools at hand, and wind up with a program that could not be legally used because someone else followed the same logical steps some years ago and filed for a patent on it is horrifying.

      Thats essentially what both an AI does and what ChatGBT does. Are you gonna defend that to?? Just dont take credit for shit someone else made, who cares if its Nintendo. I don’t want my game sprites altered and then sold as though whoever altered them made them by hand

      I was mislead about what the lawsuit was about and Im retracting all my statements thank you :’ )

      • Veneroso@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        My cock is not inspired after reading this bad take.

        John Carmack is human intelligence and therefore more valuable than artificially generated drivel.

        -edit- I mistook inspecting for inspiring for your name. I’m leaving it.

        • skulblaka@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 months ago

          John Carmack is human intelligence

          [X] Doubt

          John Carmack is many things, but I have my doubts about whether human is one of them. At minimum, he’s some kind of alien. Most days I lean more toward incognito archdevil of the plane of knowledge. I’ve heard someone accuse him of being God, or at least standing in for him on Wednesdays.

        • Cock_Inspecting_Asexual@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          I never said John is an AI. But there are steps Palworld coulda taken to avoid the inevitable. If anything its just sad they did nothing to prevent this. I can see why thousands of people like it a fuckton. But they did nothing to actually avoid this from happening.

          • skulblaka@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 months ago

            The whole game was intended from the very beginning to thumb their nose at Nintendo, just so happens that it got really popular and sold a ton of copies because it isn’t difficult to make a better Pokémon game than The Pokémon Company does, even when the entire game in question is a shitpost.

            • Cock_Inspecting_Asexual@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              2 months ago

              Im not about to sit here and tout the game that gives Lugia a gun as a game better than Pokemon, fuck no 😭😭😭

              I’ve changed my statements (see above) about the lawsuit but this game is DEADASS just a higher quality newgrounds game similar to “Mario with a gun/bazooka/truck”

              A shitpost is a better way to describe this. I simply refuse to look past the quirky, cartoony, 3d monsters HOLDING WHOLE ASS GLOCKS n RIFLES, to suspend my disbelief just enough to enjoy whatever this game has to offer. It hits these levels of Uncanniness with me that I severely dont like and bothers me for whatever reason.

              • skulblaka@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                2 months ago

                And that’s fine, different strokes and all. I personally find it highly goddamn hilarious and enjoy playing it with my gaming group. I just think it’s a little disingenuous to say “palworld devs did nothing to prevent this, sad” when the whole original concept was basically designed around parodying Pokémon. They knew what they were doing.

        • Cock_Inspecting_Asexual@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          Yea I dont wanna double down on some goofy shit if im wrong. Im a bit of a diagnosed spaz🥴 So being wrong about an opinion for me is a 50/50 and im not afraid to admit that

      • Couldbealeotard@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        2 months ago

        You are conflating copyright and patents. Copyright is protection for the expression of an idea, like the art design. This is a patent issue, which is a protection of how something works.

        If somehow I patent a vague mechanic like “a method of selecting weapons with the directions of an analogue stick or mouse, presented as an 8 direction on screen circle.” Then I could sue Red Dead Redemption and Batman Arkham, despite there being no copyright infringement with whatever game I made with that feature.

        • Cock_Inspecting_Asexual@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          Aren’t they suing because of the 3d models?? not the design of them but the fact they took Nintendo models and tweaked them???

          If im deadass wrong I will 100% shut tf up and delete my rants.

          • dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            14
            ·
            2 months ago

            Aren’t they suing because of the 3d models??

            No, they’re not. The word “patent” is used in every single article about this repeatedly. Patents are not the same as copyrights.

            A copyright protects a creative work: A work of fiction, a movie, a character.

            A patent protects the method in which the way a thing functions: A machine, a chip, an algorithm, or in Nintendo’s assertion certain vague gameplay concepts.

              • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                Being called wrong is not the same as being called a name.

                But respect for admitting being wrong.

                • Cock_Inspecting_Asexual@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  I once again am here to admit a loss.

                  I missread “Deadass” as “Dipshit”

                  In conclusion I AM WAY TOO FUCKING AUTISTIC FOR THIS POST RN. Reading comprehension got me at an all time low 😭😭😭