It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
FUNCOM KILLED FINATICD HIS FAMILY
i cant think of any other reason for his behaviour since this guy is even worse then badboybilly seriously, what do you do for a living? how old are you? cause yea, 24 years old? that must be REALLY sad if its true.
do mail paltalk, im sure you will be succesfull, with the amount of time you dig up info from funcom im sure you can help them in the lawsuit. good luck!
MMOs currently playing: -About to play: Lord of the Rings OnlinePlayed: Anarchy Online (alltime favorite) and lots of f2p titles (honorable mentions: 9Dragons, Martial Heroes, Dekaron, Atlantica Online)
Originally posted by Darth_Osor 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?
Funcom is not named in this blanket suit. The OP is spiteful and hateful wishing deliberate harm onto others. Deliberately willing harm on others is a sign of a sick and troubled mind.
Or more likely Finaticd just found something he might could try to bash AoC with. It's funny to see how desperate he is to grab onto anything remotely connected to AoC so that he can bash it.
Playing: Battlefield - Bad company (Xbox360) Arma2, DFO (PC)On my radar: TSW, MOMMO's played: SWG (pre cu/cu), WoW, AoC, WAR, DFO, PlanetsideMMO's that I have tested: Lotro, L2, Aion, Ryzom
Originally posted by warty 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
They are going for blizz actully but OP put a misinforming title and posted at AOC forum ,title could be" is blizz patent infringing " (replace blizz for any other big mmo company www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2009/09/16/westwoods_turbine_inc_named_in_patent_infringement_lawsuit/. Finaticd get a life
I took a look at the patents held by Paltalk, for a bit of amusement because I know how these things go. The original post's claim that "Paltalk seems to be the source of a code that allows for communication for most online games so AoC probably uses that technology" is fairly absurd.
First of all, to anyone who is unfamiliar with patent law, you can patent pretty much anything. Let me illustrate this with another Paltalk patent I found, when looking through their patent portfolio. Here is the "invention":
A graphical user interface displays a unique graphical indexing element such as a tab for each engaged and non-engaged messaging session. The user chooses which messaging session to make engaged by selecting its graphical indexing element. The graphical indexing elements have various distinctive characteristics to indicate the status of their respective messaging sessions, such as engaged, non-engaged with no unread messages, or non-engaged with at least one unread message. The messaging sessions may all be docked, in which event the engaged messaging session is displayed in a window pane set and the other messaging sessions are not displayed, or may be selectively undocked, in which event the engaged messaging session and the undocked messaging sessions are displayed in respective window pane sets. The engaged window pane set supports the communication of original or predefined messages between the user's digital device and the pal's messaging-enabled digital device, regardless of capability.
Basically, in 2002 Paltalk patented chat tabs. Chat tabs that blink when messages are unread. Think about that. You might wonder how such a thing is possible, but its a combination of Moore's Law and the fact that technologically savvy individuals tend not to go work at the Patent Office. What's obvious to you and me, as gamers, might seem revolutionary to the man with the rubber stamp. Especially when obscured by the language of patent law. This particular patent is called: "Method, apparatus and computer readable medium for multiple messaging session management with a graphical user interface"
Now its not specified in the articles which patent they are suing under (although I strongly suspect it's the one that basically patents clients talking to servers to form some 'game'). All of the 10 or so patents they have are what is commonly know as patent trolling. It works like this. First, you pick some common and vague idea already floating around the edge of technology. Something that's already been done, but you suspect more companies will start doing it. File a patent and describe the idea as generically as possible with maximum legalese. Then wait.
The endgame of such an endeavour is to either sell your patent (as HearMe did to Paltalk). Or, you can sue a large corporation that is using whatever common sense idea you have patented. The trick is to pick a large corporation whose cost of winning in court is more than the sum being asked for in the suit. This is all that's going on here.
Funcom was probably not listed in the suit, because they are a smaller corporation, and it would be worth their time to fight the suit (and win). Which they most certainly would, because the patents held by Paltalk are all nonsense.
Think the OP is nerd raging over a game.
Originally posted by Teala Think the OP is nerd raging over a game.
Omg! I found the OP on youtube
I think one of the reasons that like people to watch these forums is the business-story that Funcom has forged.
Anyone who have ever been involved in business on some kind of decision making level would most likely take some interest in the plight of Funcom. Especially those who saw the story occur from day one.
But never forget: FC is the architect of their own misery.
No different than any other company that conducted business in the same manner. If companies like this don't default into failure; imagine how much it would suck to do business on any level. It might sound cruel, but if AoC fails (and i think it has), it sends a message to other game makers to show them what happens when you do business in a poor manner when realising an MMO. That's good for everybody (in gaming), whether you see it or not.
So now FC knows...the rules apply to everyone.
I think the OP has made an interesting point that if FC gets sued, it would be the last thing in the world Funcom's accounting department could possibly want. A substantial lawsuit could bury FC once and for all.
Is there a certain population of people who would LOVE to see that happen?
And whose fault is that?(hint:: not the OP)
If you think Funcom releases really bad games you really have never been in a bad game launch..
I remember when I got STALKER back in the day, which you got about 50 hours into and the game just crashed and you could not continue. After a few months a patch came which completely erased your character. Now THAT is a horrible launch. A number of other games I've tried have also been unplayable, and not the hyperbole "unplayable" surrounding AoC being so.
A game missing some a few core and mostly esotheric concepts is actually not abnormal. One of the guys on the official forums right after launch crying most about the missing DX10 had his WinXP system spec in his sig...
Anyway, you obviously have no clue about business. If Funcom goes, there is less competition. Less competition = fewer games. Fewer games = less innovation. Less innovation = worse games. Say what you want about Funcom, but their low fantasy setting and high graphics have pushed the bar up.
Never forget Total war: Empire!
Bugs, bugs, bugs, bugs....
Played:From Earth & Beyond, Anarchy Online, Matrix Online, Star Wars Galaxies, World of Warcraft, Age of Conan, Tabula Rasa (Beta), EvE Online, City of Villians, Atlantica Online, Guild Wars, Lineage 2, Pirates of the Burning Sea, PlanetSide, RF Online, Second Life, Fallen Earth.