OnLive's recently acquired patent, which covers "Apparatus and method for wireless video gaming," may seem like a death knell for other players in the cloud gaming space. However, Gaikai's David Perry recently told VentureBeat he's not too concerned with the future of his game-streaming company, saying, "We do not expect the general concept of remote gaming to be patentable, as many of us played remote games in the 70s, 80s and 90s." Should the patent stick, he added that Gaikai's focus on embeddable demos of PC games is far removed from OnLive's set top box business model, which should prevent any potential infringements.
Fellow game-streamer Otoy's CEO Jules Urbach also chimed in on the patent, saying, "We respect the valid intellectual property rights of others but we'd be surprised to see a valid patent issue today that would preempt the entire field of server-side rendered gaming." Wait, you can do that? Well, man, we've been wasting so much time. We patent ... um, sandwiches! And gardening! And pet supplies! And candy! We're going to be so super rich.
Reader Comments (5)
Posted: Dec 17th 2010 1:51AM Dan50 said
Don't forget to patent patenting!!!!!!!
Posted: Dec 17th 2010 2:33AM Lucon said
Its not that complicated really.Ppl steps over patents and IPs everyday, thats why theres a job for patent checker.But unless you take it as whole, you wont be sued.If you use parts of it, you might have to pay some royalties.Ppl get sued if you used parts of them without acknowledgement.Like how a particular minimap of most open world game, is the IP of Rockstar Games.An example would be Infamous and Prototype minimap, which is an IP from Rockstar's GTA.
Reply
Posted: Dec 17th 2010 3:47AM Scott YAWMA said
I already pattented patenting...
Posted: Dec 17th 2010 4:38AM hami83 said
Ugh the whole patenting system is utterly broken.
You can't patent a food recipe and you should be able to patent how software WORKS.
Protecting IPs is one thing, like the term "app store" or "onlive" but saying own the rights to streaming games over the Internet is just DUMB.
That's like Nintendo applying a patent on game software where you have the ability to jump.
It's just so stupid and is only there to stifle competition more then protect company assets.
You can't patent a food recipe and you should be able to patent how software WORKS.
Protecting IPs is one thing, like the term "app store" or "onlive" but saying own the rights to streaming games over the Internet is just DUMB.
That's like Nintendo applying a patent on game software where you have the ability to jump.
It's just so stupid and is only there to stifle competition more then protect company assets.
Posted: Dec 17th 2010 11:59AM hahnchen said
The chances are, the patent won't stand under court scrutiny unless it refers only to a crazily specific implementation, in which case, it would be easy to work around.
Remote gaming is just a subset of remote desktops which have been around for decades. There's probably some patents involved already, but they won't be expensive to license.
Remote gaming is just a subset of remote desktops which have been around for decades. There's probably some patents involved already, but they won't be expensive to license.





