DeepEnigma
Gold Member
OK, I fixed my quick and dirty translation
Thanks, adding to OP.
OK, I fixed my quick and dirty translation
Genicap is that guy's company.
You can't patent a formula, but apparently you can patent applications of a formula.
Anyway, these are the patents he's filed
http://patents.justia.com/inventor/johan-gielis
Interesting but I wonder if this will come down to technicalities. NMS seems to have been using the formula before the file date. Could that have some effect on the companies ability to patent it?
Horizon looks great but this is a really disappointing move from Guerilla.
as I understood from one of the informatic law courses I had in college, a program can be patented, a mathematical algorithm can't, BUT you can patent an idea, and that's exactly what they did, they patented the idea of using the algorithm in a program.
This is intriguing
... Sean Murray confirmed to Business Insider that its planetary system is based on the superformula. Sparrow denies that both companies had been in contact 'we are working on a game formula based on the superformula ourselves'. It'd be great if we could share our knowledge with Hello Games. We've tried to get into touch with them but didn't get any reaction.
According to IT-Lawyer Arnoud Engelfriet this ordeal could become an issue for Sony. "If they did break any patents, then they have to pay a fine and distribution has to be halted". Sony doesn't want respond on the matter.
Ruzie, lol. Fighting.
Last 2 paragraphs:
It's an over exaggeration that resembles Telegraaf to the core.
They blow things way out of proportion.
I wonder if this will lead to another delay due to litigation...
Why are they complaining about this now, like 3 weeks away from release, while they could have easily filed a lawsuit when the game was revealed. Isn't there something like a statute of limitations on these kind of claims?
So they aren't patenting the formula they are patenting the idea of using the formula in an entertainment program. That is basically the exact same thing how could that be approved?
The Superformula is based on the superellipse, a formula from the early 19th century. Gielis shouldn't have been able to patent it in the first place, especially since it describes a natural phenomenon and isn't an invention.Sean Murray didn't confirm they were using the formula until late 2015. The company claims the have been attempting to talk to them. So it's not all of a sudden.
Sean Murray didn't confirm they were using the formula until late 2015. The company claims the have been attempting to talk to them. So it's not all of a sudden.
Ah, that makes sense. But still, why is this story public now and not ages ago?
Ah, that makes sense. But still, why is this story public now and not ages ago?
Ah, that makes sense. But still, why is this story public now and not ages ago?
Probably bigger chance of getting compensated because the release is around the corner. Less time to build a case.
Patent holding companies tend to go to the press before the courts in an attempt to just get licensing since courts can occasionally go in completely random directions. If this goes to court they could just as likely end up with their application invalidated then they could having it upheld.
I doubt Genicap's Science Department are making these claims just to catch a quick buck.
It sounds like they are genuinely interested in how Hello Games created their game. They also mention that they do not want to harm the release of the game, or the company creating it.
They just want to know which formula they used, how they used it and what they accomplished.
I doubt Genicap's Science Department are making these claims just to catch a quick buck.
It sounds like they are genuinely interested in how Hello Games created their game. They also mention that they do not want to harm the release of the game, or the company creating it.
They just want to know which formula they used, how they used it and what they accomplished.
I doubt Genicap's Science Department are making these claims just to catch a quick buck.
It sounds like they are genuinely interested in how Hello Games created their game. They also mention that they do not want to harm the release of the game, or the company creating it.
They just want to know which formula they used, how they used it and what they accomplished.
I wouldn't be surprised if they wanted access to the source code instead of licensing funds.
The kicker is that they are using this formula to generate the simulation we all currently live in.
Just FYI, I own the patent on multiplication. You all owe me a dollar.
Where does the [they don't] in the title come from?
Telegraaf is probably the closest thing we have to the Daily Mail/The Sun, it's pretty bad. Story screams patent trolling.
Telegraaf is probably the closest thing we have to the Daily Mail/The Sun, it's pretty bad. Story screams patent trolling.
I can't imagine they'd really want this to reach the courts, I'd assume that they currently own an unchallenged patent but understand that there's a high chance of it just getting torn up as soon as the courts get hold of it.
It's not that unusual for companies like the one doing this to try and scare smaller companies with claims like this and hope that they get something, anything out of them. Hello Games are probably right to just not acknowledge these people, if they really want to spend money on dealing with this in the courts and risk losing their patent, let them do it.
It's lucky that I didn't suggest anything that contradicts that then, isn't it?The dutch are the smaller company in this case. NMS is a 60$ AAA game backed by sony.
Sorry then. I thought that when you wrote:It's lucky that I didn't suggest anything that contradicts that then, isn't it?
A mod put it there.
Yes, I stated that it's not unusual for this to happen to smaller companies. Although it's not an absolute term, Hello Games is the definition of a "smaller company". They're not even close to being classed as an SME in relation of annual revenue or number of employees.Sorry then. I thouht that when you wrote:
"It's not that unusual for companies like the one doing this to try and scare smaller companies with claims like this and hope that they get something,"
you meant Hello games (who are now backed by sony ) and not the dutch company.
OK, but where is this backed? I don't see anything indicating that they don't own the [idea of using] the algorithm. Is this just about the technicality that you cannot patent the algorithm itself? Because that't quite picky and a bit unfair against the Dutch company.
Apparently they circumvented this by not patenting the algorithm itself, but the idea of using this algorithm in an application.Quick Goggle, dunno if this is applicable:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_patents_under_United_Kingdom_patent_law
"Substantive law
Although it is an implicit requirement of Section 1(1) of the UK Patent Act (1977) that patents should only be granted for inventions, "invention" is not defined anywhere in the Act.
Instead, Section 1(2) Patents Act provides a non-exhaustive list of "things" that are not treated as inventions. Included in this list is "a program for a computer". However these things are only prevented from being treated as inventions "to the extent that a patent or application for a patent relates to that thing as such".
Article 52(2) of the European Patent Convention (EPC)[2] includes a slightly different list of non-inventions, although "programs for computers" are present. Article 52(3) EPC then states that patentability for the identified subject matter or activities is excluded "only to the extent to which a European patent application or European patent relates to such subject-matter or activities as such".
The wording of the Patents Act is slightly different from Article 52 EPC, but the UK Courts have taken the view that since the purpose of Section 1 of the Patents Act was to transpose the requirements of Article 52 EPC into UK law, any differences between the EPC and the Patents Act should be ignored. The text of the EPC itself should therefore be regarded as definitive.
Other things that are not regarded as inventions include mathematical methods, and schemes, rules and methods for performing mental acts, playing games or doing business. These additional excluded categories often overlap with the exclusion of computer programs since they may be put into practice using a computer."
Apparently they circumvented this by not patenting the algorithm itself, but the idea of using this algorithm in an application.
When Hello games were on their own, I would agree with you. But now they have sony's support, so as far as I am concerned they aren't a small indie team anymore.Yes, I stated that it's not unusual for this to happen to smaller companies. Although it's not an absolute term, Hello Games is the definition of a "smaller company". They're not even close to being classed as an SME in relation of annual revenue or number of employees.
Telegraaf is probably the closest thing we have to the Daily Mail/The Sun, it's pretty bad. Story screams patent trolling.
Why would Dutch law apply anywhere outside the Netherlands?OK, but where is this backed? I don't see anything indicating that they don't own the [idea of using] the algorithm. Is this just about the technicality that you cannot patent the algorithm itself? Because that't quite picky and a bit unfair against the Dutch company.
@Handy Fake: I don't think it's applicable, we'd need Dutch law here, no?
The algortihn generates shapes. Probably very distinct shapes.I'm confused at how they can assert that they own the algorithm without knowing the source code?
That's not how stuff works in relation to what class of business they are.When Hello games were on their own, I would agree with you. But now they have sony's support, so as far as I am concerned they aren't a small indie team anymore.