Is Funcom patent infringing, which could jeapordize the company?

finaticd · September 2009

Sorry, I wouldn't ask but Funcom has a long history of unethical and currupt behavior which opened the door.

Paltalk seems to be the source of a code that allows for communication for most online games so AoC probably uses that technology. I didn't notice any licenses with paltalk and googling the two names brings up nothing so are they stealing the technology? idk so I'm asking.

Anyways, www.gamespot.com/news/6228714.html

I was thinking about E-mailing Paltalk about it, Funcom has 20 million or so left from going public so it isn't like they can't afford to pay for the technology or a lawsuit. They are suing Sony over EQ1 and EQ2 which is from Japan so I doubt Norway would protect them from a suit of this scale.

I'm suprised that Funcom hasn't been class action law suited for false advertisement by now. Lawyers better hurry as Funcom is burning through thier cache of cash ;p

Leucrotta · September 2009

They are basicly trying this on all mmo companies not just funcom.

I believe NCSOft is a year in court with them already or a simular case

marinrider · September 2009

Are you honestly going to contact them without even knowing if what you say is true or not? Thats what I got from this line, "AoC probably uses that technology."

finaticd · September 2009

They are just blanket lawsuiting they can sort out the details in discovery. And I asked because I'm sure someone will know, employees of Funcom post here all the time.

Out of any MMO company Funcom seems the most unethical though so I doubt they would pay for something they could get for free.

20 million in cash is enough to pique a lawyers interest enough to find out. That is what 6 million easy money?

LodenDSG · September 2009

Hate to see stuff like this, no matter who did wrong you know who will get hurt?

The gamers, there is another group after NCSoft as well though its about the most frivilous one I have ever seen and I remimber the suing of McDonalds over having hot coffie. (http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/oh_the_games_youll_play_a_deeper_look_at_the_worlds_vs._ncsoft_lawsuit/)

This kind of money grubbing which is what it seems like to me is never good for the consumer but rarely hurts the corps them selves at least in the long run. As to who is in the right or the wrong here with the case you mentioned im really not sure and dont realy care beyond the impact it is going to have on us the gamers. Its a shame to see dirty buisness soiling game but any time you have buisness you get dirty buisness. I for one dont hope for the fall of any dev house even EA which I loath I would hope they dont get wacked like this. So as to your post im left wondering are you hoping Funcom falls and why? I understand you may not like there products or there company but hoping for the failuer of company or even a single game seems a little odd to me and I wonder what your reasoning is if in fact you are hoping for the fall.

orlac · September 2009

Gee, I'll bet Paltalk's lawyers never thought of Funcom. It will take a game board poster with an unwholesome personal vendetta against a game they don't play to alert them.

Sevenwind · September 2009

Originally posted by finaticd

I was thinking about E-mailing Paltalk about it, Funcom has 20 million or so left from going public so it isn't like they can't afford to pay for the technology or a lawsuit. They are suing Sony over EQ1 and EQ2 which is from Japan so I doubt Norway would protect them from a suit of this scale.

What is your problem with Funcom? Seriously, are you trying to say you're Mr. Justice and going to tattle to Paltalk that Funcom might be using said technology? You think you will get something in return for doing it? A pat on the back? Some kind of money reward?

You absolutely have a serious fetish problem with Funcom. You almost have this ex-employee rage about yourself. Just think if you directed all that hate you have for Funcom into something productive.

Honestly write whatever you want but know your efforts are almost all in vain because I don't think anyone really takes you seriously on this site, I know I don't.

Sevenwind · September 2009

Originally posted by orlac

Gee, I'll bet Paltalk's lawyers never thought of Funcom. It will take a game board poster with an unwholesome personal vendetta against a game they don't play to alert them.

So well said...Yeah let us know Finaticd the correspondence you get in return after you email them about Funcom.

finaticd · September 2009

Originally posted by Sevenwind

Originally posted by finaticd

I was thinking about E-mailing Paltalk about it, Funcom has 20 million or so left from going public so it isn't like they can't afford to pay for the technology or a lawsuit. They are suing Sony over EQ1 and EQ2 which is from Japan so I doubt Norway would protect them from a suit of this scale.

What is your problem with Funcom? Seriously, are you trying to say you're Mr. Justice and going to tattle to Paltalk that Funcom might be using said technology? You think you will get something in return for doing it? A pat on the back? Some kind of money reward?

You absolutely have a serious fetish problem with Funcom. You almost have this ex-employee rage about yourself. Just think if you directed all that hate you have for Funcom into something productive.

Honestly write whatever you want but know your efforts are almost all in vain because I don't think anyone really takes you seriously on this site, I know I don't.

Funcom lied to YOU, the player, time and time again and has done the wrong thing time and time again, so what? Then they false advertised some stuff.

You play AoC so would any other MMO players take you seriously aside from the few peorsons left on the few med pop servers? I know I don't.

I like the other companises they are pretty good, they usually don't go around trying to break the law.

Sevenwind · September 2009

Originally posted by finaticd

Originally posted by Sevenwind

Originally posted by finaticd

I was thinking about E-mailing Paltalk about it, Funcom has 20 million or so left from going public so it isn't like they can't afford to pay for the technology or a lawsuit. They are suing Sony over EQ1 and EQ2 which is from Japan so I doubt Norway would protect them from a suit of this scale.

What is your problem with Funcom? Seriously, are you trying to say you're Mr. Justice and going to tattle to Paltalk that Funcom might be using said technology? You think you will get something in return for doing it? A pat on the back? Some kind of money reward?

You absolutely have a serious fetish problem with Funcom. You almost have this ex-employee rage about yourself. Just think if you directed all that hate you have for Funcom into something productive.

Honestly write whatever you want but know your efforts are almost all in vain because I don't think anyone really takes you seriously on this site, I know I don't.

You play AoC so would any other MMO players take you seriously?

Yeah probably more than you think. It's not the only MMO I play either.

Unknown · September 2009

Actually if you look at their proceedings, Funcom are one of the few people that aren't named in their claims.

Now I am no expert but at a guess Funcom's network tech probably pre-dates the patents they are cliaming on since AoC was directly based on the AO tech which was started on as early as 1995/6 (Funcom devs confirmed that AO was in development for five or six years before it's 2001 launch) so it's possibly hard for them to go back that far with this patent claim.

finaticd · September 2009

I edited my last post and EQ1 predates that patent as well and it was named in the suit.

I am just curious as to why Funcom wasn't named, is Norway law so lax they can do whatever? I know in Norway a DUI nets you a year in prison but aside from that maybe they have no business laws.

IDK I have played other MMOs and I never talk about AoC but people laugh and rage whenever that name is uttered...the Joke is on Funcom trying to sell the expansion or TSW. EDIT: in contrast I mentioned EQ2 in AoC chat and people praised that game, I stated AoC has issues in Tyranny global and people agreed.

Sevenwind · September 2009

Originally posted by finaticd

Originally posted by Sevenwind

Originally posted by finaticd

I was thinking about E-mailing Paltalk about it, Funcom has 20 million or so left from going public so it isn't like they can't afford to pay for the technology or a lawsuit. They are suing Sony over EQ1 and EQ2 which is from Japan so I doubt Norway would protect them from a suit of this scale.

What is your problem with Funcom? Seriously, are you trying to say you're Mr. Justice and going to tattle to Paltalk that Funcom might be using said technology? You think you will get something in return for doing it? A pat on the back? Some kind of money reward?

You absolutely have a serious fetish problem with Funcom. You almost have this ex-employee rage about yourself. Just think if you directed all that hate you have for Funcom into something productive.

Honestly write whatever you want but know your efforts are almost all in vain because I don't think anyone really takes you seriously on this site, I know I don't.

Funcom lied to YOU, the player, time and time again and has done the wrong thing time and time again, so what? Then they false advertised some stuff.

You play AoC so would any other MMO players take you seriously aside from the few peorsons left on the few med pop servers? I know I don't.

Exactly SO WHAT! I quit the first month because the game was a buggy POS. I came back in Novemeber and the game was fun to play so I stayed. I didn't go into a tiffy that there was no DX10, no drunken brawling etc etc. Sure nice things to have but my gawd not game stopping features.

Is there not a game company on these forums that promised something and didn't deliver? Bugs that seem to never get fixed? Balance issues on classes?

Unknown · September 2009

Originally posted by finaticd

I am just curious as to why Funcom wasn't named, is Norway law so lax they can do whatever? I know in Norway a DUI nets you a year in prison but aside from that maybe they have no business laws.

It is probably not named because they can't be touched, otherwise surely the company would have named them? They have named everyone else they can get their hands on!

From what I understand Funcom is also officially a Dutch company with offices in Oslo, Switzerland and Luxemburg or something like that, with a set-up like that they are probably very hard to sue as well

neoterrar · September 2009

I'd guess it would have something to do with international law being applied rather than US law.

There is a reason the United States are one of the most litigious societies, the law makes it easy.

Somnulus · September 2009

Does anyone know if perhaps Funcom actually DOES license the Paltalk technology, which is why they aren't named in the suit?

I mean, "I didn't notice any..." blah blah is hardly substantial.

Some concrete information would be nice before we get to the lynching portion of this topic.

Larry2298 · September 2009

It looks like AOC do not have Naming Policy. It was annoyed to see commerical advertising spammed by a guy names Volkswagon (lv80) on our server (EU English), and a guy names Ladygagaa spammed lyrics on the global channel.

If there was Naming Policy in AOC guess both names are approved.

Blackwell99 · September 2009

Im going to guess AO, AoC,and SW use Paltalk.

Why?

The simple reason that Funcom does not seem to develop any real gaming technology on their own.

If they could--they wouldn't be recycling the Dreamworld engine for Secret World. (and it was a ghastly engine even in 1999)

Maybe they outsourced the job, but I'll bet it would have worked out cheaper to just buy the rights to use the technology. But not as cheap as stealing it of course. With all the big players ripping it off...I'll bet anything FC ripped it off too. If anyone has the "me too" attitude it's Funcom.

If AoC wasn't mentioned on that list-it's probably because of the game being irrelevant.

Barteaux · September 2009

Originally posted by Blackwell99

Im going to guess AO, AoC,and SW use Paltalk. Ok, So you're going to guess in support of OP's guesswork
Why? Ye, please tell us why this is a plausible theory
The simple reason that Funcom does not seem to develop any real gaming technology on their own. Ok, basing your guess on a guess
If they could--they wouldn't be recycling the Dreamworld engine for Secret World. (and it was a ghastly engine even in 1999) Werent you going to give an example of something funcom doesn't develop themselves?
Maybe they outsourced the job, This is it? Maybe they outsorced the job?

Your need to bash Funcom is well documented, but through this kind of posting you reduce your relevance on this forum. You can of course just make a few alts, but with the rate FC-haters go through alts, I'm not sure there are many nicks left.

warty · September 2009

Meh, I love how none of these bastard companies will go after blizzard. just fucking wait for it, the day will come when one thinks they can bullshit the courts over blizzard, then we will see a court crushing like none other, and it will be gooooood

ericbelser · September 2009

Everyone's tech pre-dates these jackasses, that's why the lawsuit is a piece of garbage fishing expedition.

Believe me, I *LOATHE* funcom, but they aren't the bad guys here...that pack of bottom-feeding lawyer scum is. The lawsuit is totally baseless and would be tossed out of any serious court...which is why they are fishing for settlements and looking for the biggest district of Oprah-fied morons they can go to court in.

Lunshea · September 2009

Originally posted by finaticd

I am just curious as to why Funcom wasn't named, is Norway law so lax they can do whatever? I know in Norway a DUI nets you a year in prison but aside from that maybe they have no business laws.

We have lot's of them, actually. We do, however, use them carefully and base them on people being responsible for their own actions, unlike certain other countries where the law system has gone totally stampede (no names mentioned ^^).

Regarding "taking people seriously"; well I better not comment on that one, I might risk getting sued...

Crashloop · September 2009

Originally posted by finaticd

Sorry, I wouldn't ask but Funcom has a long history of unethical and currupt behavior which opened the door.
Why sorry? You have proven time after time you are desperatly finding new things to bash or troll AOC and Funcom for. you probably get some kind of pleasure out of this so no need to say sorry about it, because anyone who have been following your posting history know's you don't mean it.
Paltalk seems to be the source of a code that allows for communication for most online games so AoC probably uses that technology. I didn't notice any licenses with paltalk and googling the two names brings up nothing so are they stealing the technology? idk so I'm asking.
I love when you assume things, which you do a lot btw. ever thought about sticking to facts? Yes Paltalk have a code for communications between computers which seems to often have been used in online games both on consoles and PC's. You again assume this technology is being used in AoC without actually knowing the exact patent the other have been sued for or what this patent does. This alone tells me your desperate.
Anyways, www.gamespot.com/news/6228714.html
I was thinking about E-mailing Paltalk about it, Funcom has 20 million or so left from going public so it isn't like they can't afford to pay for the technology or a lawsuit. They are suing Sony over EQ1 and EQ2 which is from Japan so I doubt Norway would protect them from a suit of this scale.
Why not e-mail Paltalk about it, and let them be the judges. Any company who steals a code others have been working for should be punished. But the whole way you aim this post is to try to make it look like funcom probably uses it which I find hilarious. More so the fact that you have to make a post stating you plan to do so. It's obvious you feel raped by funcom, and I'm glad they have such a delussional hater like you trying to bash them as much as you do. Again you make a fail thread based on a simple thing which has become your trademark on bashing Funcom. you assume stuff. The link seems to specify quite clearly what companies and products they are suing for using this code. Funcom isn't on the list neither is a lot of other developers. The one question that link gives me is who the heck is this paltalk company, and since Microsoft settles this outside trial we never will know if they actually are guilty or if they just saw it cheaper to pay them out now rather then go through an expensive trial. For all we know paytalk can have a good case here and have seen they can make some easy money of it. I do hope this one goes to trial so we might see the true of all of this.
I'm suprised that Funcom hasn't been class action law suited for false advertisement by now. Lawyers better hurry as Funcom is burning through thier cache of cash ;p
Why don't you try to sue funcom for false advertisement then? If your surprised no one has tried I'm sure there is possibilities for you to actually win a case too. Then again you would have to stick to facts and that is really not your strong side.

Hoobley · September 2009

Originally posted by finaticd

I was thinking about E-mailing Paltalk about it

ffs man go outside, seriously........

Crashloop · September 2009

Originally posted by finaticd

I edited my last post and EQ1 predates that patent as well and it was named in the suit.
I am just curious as to why Funcom wasn't named, is Norway law so lax they can do whatever? I know in Norway a DUI nets you a year in prison but aside from that maybe they have no business laws.
True norway has no businiess laws, here we can copy codes and do all kind of stuff and never get away with it. It's and awesome country really.
IDK I have played other MMOs and I never talk about AoC but people laugh and rage whenever that name is uttered...the Joke is on Funcom trying to sell the expansion or TSW. EDIT: in contrast I mentioned EQ2 in AoC chat and people praised that game, I stated AoC has issues in Tyranny global and people agreed.
AoC has issues yes, no one with a sane mind can deny that. But tell me 1 MMO that haven't had issues or have issues still today.

Darth_Osor · September 2009

Either Funcom isn't using unlicensed technology, or Funcom is immune to the suit for some reason. I doubt the ambulance chasing type lowlifes that filed this suit forgot about Funcom.

Why is this thread even still open? Since Funcom isn't named in the suit, what does this have to do with AoC?

Howdy, Stranger!

Is Funcom patent infringing, which could jeapordize the company?

Comments

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Is Funcom patent infringing, which could jeapordize the company?

Comments