Paltalk Sues Pretty Much Every Multiplayer Gaming Company Over Patents
from the don't-speak dept
Last time we wrote about Paltalk, it was an article talking about how the company had put together a decent business charging for the use of its chatting software. Apparently that business model wasn't decent enough, because the company has gone into all out patent lawsuit war. A bunch of folks have sent in various versions of the story, but basically, Paltalk has sued a bunch of the big name multiplayer online gaming companies, Activision-Blizzard, Sony, NCSoft, Turbine and Jagex. The back story is that the company bought some patents a few years back (anyone know which patents? -- a quick search doesn't turn up much) from another company. It claims that the patents cover "technologies for sharing data among many connected computers so that all users see the same digital environment." Initially, it sued Microsoft, and spent years fighting that case, until Microsoft figured it was cheaper to settle earlier this year, and handed over an undisclosed amount of cash. With that new bankroll, Paltalk has launched this new suit. While it likes to claim that the Microsoft settlement validates the patent, all it really does is show that Microsoft realized it was cheaper to settle than to fight. It would be rather useful to know which patents these are, specifically, because virtual worlds that let multiple people see the same thing have a pretty long history.Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: games, mmo, patents
Companies: activision blizzard, ncsoft, paltalk, sony, turbine and jagex
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
That depends, are you looking for a group rate or just one person taken out?
(kidding!)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Lobo is pretty quick with a quip too!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
That sounds pretty effective.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
If Mike is right that this litigation strategy is a "bet the farm" tactic by a company that is not seeing enough revenue from its legitimate business (perhaps because it overextended itself buying cheap and worthless patents,) then it will not survive long past the end of the litigation if it loses.
BTW - don't think that just because the patents are worthless there won't be a settlement. Instead, remember that before RIM settled for $612.5mm, it had already been determined that 6 of the 7 patents at issue were invalid, and the 7th was inches from an invalidity determination. It behooved RIM to settle, leaving the 7th patent intact and exclusively licensed to RIM (the argument that the invalidity determination came "too late" to affect the judgment in district court is horse pucky).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Uhoh?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Uhoh?
from this link: http://www.mak.com/pdfs/wp_transitioning.pdf
Distributed Interactive Simulation (DIS) has radically changed the process by
which soldiers train for combat. By connecting together many types of simulations
into a shared virtual world,
and
History of DIS
In 1983 the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) sponsored
the SIMNET (SIMulation NETworking) program to create a new technology to
expand the current single task trainers into networked team trainers. SIMNET
was tremendously successful, producing over 300 networked simulators with the
technology that was to develop into DIS.
I suspect though that the patents in question are the so called "Goldberg Patents" which relate mainly to scoring systems in online games.
Once again there is substantial prior art and these patents are on the EFF's hit list.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
5,822,523 - Server-group messaging system for interactive applications
6,226,686 - Server-group messaging system for interactive applications
PalTalk acquired the patents from HearMe, formerly known as MPath.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hyun is cool.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hyun is cool.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
typical patent business model
Winning a defense of the patents? Maybe, but 'winning' with a business model of suing over possibly bogus patents? Sounds like they are winning big. I've never heard of any company being forced to return ill-gotten gains when a patent is overturned.
"Jeez we THOUGHT they were good patents - the patent office said so, so don't blame us!"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yes, they do. Peter Langston starting writing Empire back in the early 1970's, and it was quite a sophisticated multi-user virtual world by the time I first saw it circa 1981. See for example http://members.chello.at/theodor.lauppert/games/empire.htm for some background on it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: These frakin' frakers are fraked!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
These frakin' frakers are fraked!
Somebody sat down, read this patent application, and signed off on it.
Scratch that: some FRAKIN' MORON managed to find his way into a chair and somehow managed to make his mark in the appropriate area.
Frak you, USPTO. Frak you sideways. I'm going to download something and chat about it in a GORRAM CHAT WINDOW WHICH WILL VIOLATE THIS PATENT YOU MORONS!
Gods, at this point the entire office should be forced to commit sepuku with blunt herrings for shear stupidity. I want your bowels, USPTO! COVERED IN FISH SCALES!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: These frakin' frakers are fraked!
/right there with you, btw
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: These frakin' frakers are fraked!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: These frakin' frakers are fraked!
No, I'm not out to screw the public. Frak 'em. There's no legislation that says the drooling moron who signed off on this *had to.* He almost had to go out of his way to avoid the obvious prior art. He *could* have acted like the 'public servant' he probably fancies himself.
Q: How many Patent Examiners does it take to screw in a lightbulb?
A: Approved!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Heck, even if they beat the prior art rap, (unlikely) they shouldn't be able to pass the "obvious" test. I implemented such a system in junior-high.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That was a multi user game that was way before any of the patents this refers to.
The prior art is immense and why MS caved is beyond me.
Though sometimes lately I suspect that a lot of effort is going in to trying to make out that before the current Internet there was nothing else.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
patent numbers here:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Stupid Microsoft, they should have fought this, this would have been a lawsuit I would have loved to see them win. But instead of fighting a lawsuit they should fight they turn it down and if they did fight it this would have probably been one of the FEW times I'm actually on their side.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Suit
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Join the Boycott Paltalk Group on facebook.. Spread the word.. This wont be hard to boycott anyhow seeing as noone has prolly heard of them before this suit was filed ;P
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nooob paltalk
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]