X-Box 2 - No HD and No Backwards Compatibility

[Sigma8]

There are two different issues: Patents and Trademarks. Your example of one-click shopping is an example of a patent not a trademark.

Okay, what about CD's and Movies? Steamboat Willie should, by law, be in the public domain...except for that extension that CONGRESS had to essentially grant. The contents of CD's and movies do not seem to fit into either of your nice categories above.

Also, the ability to freely distribute the content of CD's and Movies does not infringe on any trademarks therein. Those still remaint he property of the trademark holder. People cannot sell them, but they can acquire them free of charge, and benefit from the viewing/listening of them. I'm talking of course, about public domain.

So with steamboat willie, it's not like Disney is losing their grip on Mickey Mouse.. Nor should they. They've been renewing the character of Mickey Mouse with countless incarnations and additional features with him. But the old features should fucking be in the public domain.

 

[Achilles]

Now you are talking about copyrights.

Copyright protects original works of authorship, while a patent protects inventions or discoveries. A trademark protects words, phrases, symbols, or designs identifying the source of the goods or services of one party and distinguishing them from those of others.

The term of copyright for a particular work depends on several factors, including whether it has been published, and, if so, the date of first publication. As a general rule, for works created after Jan. 1, 1978, copyright protection lasts for the life of the author plus an additional 70 years. For an anonymous work, a pseudonymous work, or a work made for hire, the copyright endures for a term of 95 years from the year of its first publication or a term of 120 years from the year of its creation, whichever expires first.

 

[Sigma8]

I think that's the gist of Musashi spoke. That and patents together. Copyright law has been abused by big corporate entities, and patent law has been abused by morons like Jeff Bezos. And the sad thing is, is people like him who get dumb patents claim they are just staking their claims defensively, before someone else gets them...which I sorta believe. It's just insane and misused.

And given that, I can sympathize with Musashi.

 

[Doaln]

Now you are talking about copyrights.

Copyright protects original works of authorship, while a patent protects inventions or discoveries. A trademark protects words, phrases, symbols, or designs identifying the source of the goods or services of one party and distinguishing them from those of others.

The term of copyright for a particular work depends on several factors, including whether it has been published, and, if so, the date of first publication. As a general rule, for works created after Jan. 1, 1978, copyright protection lasts for the life of the author plus an additional 70 years. For an anonymous work, a pseudonymous work, or a work made for hire, the copyright endures for a term of 95 years from the year of its first publication or a term of 120 years from the year of its creation, whichever expires first.

holy shit that seems like a ridiculous amount of time. that would mean that a cartoon from 1910 is still under copyright. question though, "for the life of the author", how does that work for companies? like if a company produces something, is it the life of the company or the individuals who wrote it ? what if its a collaborative thing?

 

[Achilles]

And the sad thing is, is people like him who get dumb patents claim they are just staking their claims defensively, before someone else gets them...which I sorta believe. It's just insane and misused.

That is an improper assertion. US Patent law gives protection to the first to invent, not the first to file (One of the last, if not the last to do so). The inventor is entitled to the patent, no matter how minor as long as they are the first to invent and the subject matter is novel, has utility, and is non-obvious.

What you are questioning is the obviousness of the patent, which is separate from staking claim. A patent that is obvious should not have been issued to begin with and it is a result of the mistake made by the person examining the patent. Obvious patents are subject to being re-examined and tested by the courts. There is a due process to correct these mistakes.

It just seems people justify piracy more for social/economical reasons than simply not believing in IP laws.

 

[Achilles]

holy shit that seems like a ridiculous amount of time. that would mean that a cartoon from 1910 is still under copyright. question though, "for the life of the author", how does that work for companies? like if a company produces something, is it the life of the company or the individuals who wrote it ? what if its a collaborative thing?

In those cases it is based upon publication date as opposed to authorship.

 

[HITAKH]

I don't care about backwards compatibility with xbox games at all, but I thought the HD in the xbox was the coolest feature, and I never even modded mine.

 

[Sigma8]

What you are questioning is the obviousness of the patent, which is separate from staking claim.
[snip]
It just seems people justify piracy more for social/economical reasons than simply not believing in IP laws.

In terms of "defensive patenting" I'm just repeating what I've read some of these CEO's have said. I think what might often be the case is that they will "stake claim" on an idea, providing some proof that they invented it, and basically they will hope that nobody counter-applies with any clear prior art. I think this is what Amazon has done.

The term that seems most vague and most often unapplied is the "obviousness" of the patent issue that you mention. One-click purchasing, really, is incredibly similar to fucking two-click purchasing.

I can't speak for musashi on anything. I just said his stance has my sympathy. For my part, I avoid piracy where I'm conscious of it. However, I might make an exception if I could get my hands on a copy of steamboat willie. And since the system is dumb, I advocate change for it, and while I don't try to violate the law myself, I sympathize with those who violate it in the spirit of civil disobedience.

 

[Sigma8]

I don't care about backwards compatibility with xbox games at all, but I thought the HD in the xbox was the coolest feature, and I never even modded mine.

I never thought it was cool. Just another fragile, moving part to break. When I finally broke down and bought an Xbox when they started getting cheap, it broke the same weekend I bought it. I basically played Halo in the living room for 2 nights, and then on the third, moved it carefully to my bedroom and then it was broke. Plugged everything in, but the power wouldn't even come on. At all. Tested multiple outlets, and even set it back up in the living room. Dead.

I can't necessarily blame the hard disk for that, but when I brought it into EB to swap out (I bought a warranty, but they didn't even bother using that since it was under 10 days) they swapped me a new one. And I got home, and then I realized I didn't have my fucking Halo savegames anymore. They were on the HD. And even if I had a memory card for it, it wouldn't have mattered, because I didn't predict it would fucking break. How exactly could I get the shit off it, if it wouldn't turn on?

 

[Yaason]

le fuck

 

[Achilles]

In terms of "defensive patenting" I'm just repeating what I've read some of these CEO's have said. I think what might often be the case is that they will "stake claim" on an idea, providing some proof that they invented it, and basically they will hope that nobody counter-applies with any clear prior art. I think this is what Amazon has done.

The term that seems most vague and most often unapplied is the "obviousness" of the patent issue that you mention. One-click purchasing, really, is incredibly similar to fucking two-click purchasing.

Anytime a new innovation is made there is an IP gold rush to stake some claim . The burden is then on the Patent and Trademark Office to examine the applications. And, trust me "obviousness" is a major part of it and a great tool in rejecting bogus applications, there is an entire US Statute outlined by Congress (35 USC 103) dedicated to governing "obviousness." But, unfortunately people make mistakes and things slip by. No system is perfect.

 

[Sigma8]

No system is perfect.

Mistakes like "single click" should be fixed then, after the errors are made. So should the patent for creating "plugins", "avatars", and other such imitations of prior-art in non-computer contexts and its usage in a computer context.

I realize the patent office is supposed to work great. My complaints with it are: it's letting frivolous computer patents be registered fairly often, it's not revoking these patents even though to any computer professional, they are pretty ridiculous..
2. I'm not sure what the current status is, but patents should be valid for the original specified term of 14 years. Patents were never meant to grant an individual a lifetime of profit off a single, worthwhile invention. They were meant to let the inventor actually earn something for it, by granting him or her exclusivity for a time, and then allowing anyone to use it without royalties.

So, when somebody patents the ball point pen, 14 years later, we still don't have to pay ballpt Inc. a nickel for every pen sold. I mean, it's wonderful they got the patent for such a simple, elegant device. But its operation is obvious and 14 years is enough time for even kids to know how to make one.