Quote:
Originally Posted by darkpower
It all goes into one simple thing, though: Is the patent valid? MS can't exactly patent an idea, just their method of doing it (I made an example on N4G.com about this type of thing by analogy of a toothpaste: You can't patent a new feature, just the recipe that you used to make it possible). There is right now something similar going on with Gibson and their so-called "patent" on the type of technology that both Activision and Harmonix/EA use to do Guitar Hero and Rock Band; Gibson is trying to sue them both for "violating" said patent, Activision is fighting back, saying that the patent is invalid. I'm not too educated by what would make a patent as such (and for that matter, I haven't heard anything come out of it lately, so that issue is pretty much dead in the water unless there was something that happened recently that I missed), but that is one huge thing that is looming on patents (and yes, it IS complicated if you take the grain of salt that is Wikipedia at face value).
Where I go with this as far as fanboys are concerned (and since you decided to neg rep me on this, KK, without even looking into this ike you're known for, I'll decide to point this out)? On N4G.com (which is becoming a favorite site of mine to go to for this news), you can get comments to stories that bring the upcoming Sony PS3 custom soundtrack feature up (I call it the lunatic fringe because I sure as HELL hope that the majority of 360 fans do NOT act like this and I do dispise the lunitic fringe of the PS3 side, as well) bring it up like it came from God Himself and there is no way that Sony would be able to get around a patent or that, like they thought that whole GTA4 DLC matter was like, it was drawn up by the best lawyers in the fucking WORLD and would have absolutely no loopholes and it would never be invalid in any way. They basically think a patent and a copyright are the exact same things (they aren't. A patent is only taking care of a method. It's a copyright that is taking care of your idea, and copyrights have much stricter terms of language than patents do), and don't care that they ARE confusing the two (a view I echoed on N4G.com, twice, when that patent thing broke, and on both occasions, I had quite a few agrees). That's why I made it about "the other guy": because, right now, it's only the extreme of those fanboys that think that that patent can never be invalid and it's perfect in any way and it's so reaching that Sony can't even utter the WORDS custom soundtracks without getting nailed (okay, that last part i exagerrated a bit).
|
One of my favorite things about the ignorant is how they often make accusations of not looking intothings (apparently, in this case, "like I always do,") then proceed to spout patently (pardon the pun) false statements.
I think the problem you have, darkpower, is that you're too stupid to realise how ignorant you are. And then when you're called on it, you instead cleave to any bullshit reasoning you have going. Then, you will find one person who agrees with you, and cling to that, instead of wondering why you have to go through dozens of responses to find a single person who agrees with you.
Funnier still is that while you are correct in the misinterpretations people make about copyrights, you then go on to do so yourself.
But then, you're whining about the lunatic fringe while once again participating in the same crap that they are guilty of. Nor does it particularly make sense to bring up the forum of retards, since they had nothing to do with this prior to you bringing them in. Though, you should probably stay there, as it seems that they are truly your peers.
And Kevin, I think you're missing the point. Microsoft makes no claim to the use of custom soundtracks as a feature of any single video game. The patent is specific and not intended to do so. The point of the patent is to address the integrated system, not the custom soundtracks themselves. Not only doesn't that include custom soundtracks within games, but the concept protected would include any platform-wide use, so your XMB workaround would be lawsuit-worthy.
But since the issue here is whether or not they can use an integrated system, which is what people wanted, what DP claims is almost guaranteed, and what the patent does cover, the point is that they can't. Other methods work, and are already being used. That's not going to change.