160
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2024
160 points (97.6% liked)
PC Gaming
8551 readers
252 users here now
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
What the fuck - so, they're claiming infringement on a work that was released before they ever submitted their patent? How is that allowed? Are you telling me a company can wait until another company releases a similar product, then apply for a patent for something they used, then claim infringement? I knew patents were fucked, but I didn't realize they were that fucked.
Well it's not, you aren't supposed to be able to get a patent for something that already exists. But you know, corruption
It’s not. In fact you know how this kind of patent gets invalidated, by pointing out what’s know as prior art. Things that did “this” before that patent was filed. So Palworlds and any other game that involves capturing a creature. This “killer patent” won’t stand up in Court unless the Japanese Court is entirely different than the US and German Courts.
JP courts are corpo jokes and their IP laws are even big clown shoe than US.
I take extra pleasure pirating JP product, fuck the corporate trash
This does not make sense to me.
Not in tbe US it's not.
An existing implementation would be prior art and make it EXTREMELY easy to get the patent invalidated.
yea that sounds nasty
just don't patent anything, other companies build a product around an unpatented idea, then you patent it and sue them? now their entire product is ruined??
this makes no sense, that would mean the optimal play is to not patent anything until someone else starts doing it
I found this but found after reading it a bit I didn’t want to put in the effort to understand it lol
https://patentbaristas.com/archives/2013/05/09/the-scope-of-prior-art-by-others-under-aia-and-a-comparison-with-european-and-japanese-patent-law-what-every-scientist-and-corporate-executive-needs-to-know/