Meshpage functions incredibly similarly to Blender
This must be biggest endorcement of meshpage than I've seen in a while. Everyone thinks blender is some kind of great software, and now you're claiming meshpage is equally good.
Sadly it's not actually true. There's only the graph data structure that works similarly to blender's graph data structure. And that's covered by the maze defense.
Everything else has no chance of substantial similarity problems.
Sure, but when problems happen with technology, whoever experiences the biggest problems will need to build technology that does not have those same problems. Thus meshpage/builder is creating animations like mickey mouse, but without the same problem than what original mickey mouse had. (its something to do with <30 fps animations, basically at least 60fps is required or humans cannot handle it properly for the flicker)
Can someone animate a mouse that looks like a certain famous mouse using meshpages?
Mickey mouse accusation happens to be one of the most difficult problems in meshpage/builder. It was already recognized to be a problem in 2012, long before substantial development activity had happened. Basically mickey mouse animations have too strong effects to children watching those animations that disney cannot avoid copyright problems further down the line. Basically frame rate problem is also involved in this situation, and certain specific mickey mouse animation shown on television. It's completely outrageous for disney to put such programming on their animations meant for small children.
If preventing copyright infringement requires a game development studio to control the lives of its employees to the point where they can’t leave the studio and can’t experience any form of outside media in any way, copyright deserves to die.
These strict rules only applies to your direct competitors. Not to the whole world. Your employees can use the rest of the world as they like, it's just direct competitors where you need to be extreamly careful with giving access to competitor products to your employees.
I wish you luck in figuring out how to do that without sounding like you’re trying to hold captive and enslave an entire company’s worth of employees.
It's worse than that. In the end, your employees will think that the company brainwashed the employees and prevented them from doing their jobs properly.
But this is what is required. Copyright simply doesn't work properly unless you do some evil tricks.
Given that copyright is "negative" property, some employees are bound to feel that the rules they need to follow are too strict and prevents choosing the "best" solution from the available solutions. But best solution for single employee is not the best solution for the whole society. And copyright protects interests of the whole society against onslaught from individual people.
Good luck with that plan. My lawyers will surely respond to it with the following battery of arguments:
1) no access to blender or any works created with blender during development (The cave troll defense)
2) independently created via exploring the same maze from intel cpus (The maze defense)
3) Software was brought to stable base status before letting outside software ruin the copyright story (The stable base defense)
4) Remaining problems are math related (Mathematics is not copyrightable subject matter -defense)
5) Independently created without dependencies to infringing material (The independent creation -defense)
Basically, there's significant defenses available against your accusations.
Expressions of ideas have copyrights, but to infringe upon those, you have to basically lift that shit wholesale.
To infringe the copyright, you just need some elements:
1) access to the previous work
2) some process that lifts elements from previous work to the new work
These are the only things needed. When companies give their employees access to competitor's products, it's already very dangerous activity copyright-wise. Once the access is granted, there's very small steps needed when it becomes illegal when all kinds of processes involving human brains or photographs or fullscale examination of the essential elements of the previous work will give rise to the copyright infringements.
Basically only way to protect against this is to ensure that your employees don't have access to competitor products.
Too bad it's not real forward movement, when the activity is based on copyright infringements. Proper innovation is actually fine-tuning the concept from beginning to the end. It just depends on the greatness of the development process whether you get successes out from it, not depending on who you ripped off of.
But still the top100 most popular sites do not have 3d models available in their sites. Something must have failed in their 2000s implementation, so we have another chance of implementing it correctly.
There's no question about it, PUBG will win this fight. There's just too many similarities in the games. It's not just that they cloned all the gameplay ideas, but their feature list is almost the same in both games. Are they both using the same 3d engine, or why is competition of PUBG able to create the same scenes than what PUBG is displaying before end users had chance to play through PUBG's offering?
If they actually offered some original ideas, the competition wouldn't be able to quickly clone the material. It seems neither of the games deserve the publicity that they're getting, given that they failed to work hard enough to keep competition at its bay.
But legal entities are only looking at creation date, and whether the authors gave credit to the other party. Anything else is simply irrelevant and this is why PUBG will win this fight.
No, because I didn't like the product, not because I couldn't get it to work. Not every piece of software is for everyone and "not for me" is a perfectly valid reaction to even the best designed, bug free application.
It's clearly a bug in the product, if users do not like it. Product developers are creating significant amount of features to their products to avoid the fate that users will reject it for no good reason.
if only all of my competition were made illegal...
This isn't required. The products are slightly illegal already at the time when they get popular among end users. My position is that all products on the planet are illegal in some ways. This is required feature before the product is able to get popularity.
When comparing things, you should avoid the following:
1) comparing someone's work to the best work on the planet
2) comparing one person's work to the combined effort of a continent
3) comparing one person's work to a flexible assignment of authors
4) comparing output of different work amounts
5) comparing output based on popularity
6) comparing different time ranges, like 1700-1800 compared to 10 years of work by one person
7) etc--
You get the idea. Somehow the comparision is unfair if your comparision targets are not similar type.
For that matter, why are you competing with me?
You're better target than blender or maya, since you don't have 200 people working for you.
Where's your Scott Cawthon copyright notice?
You should ask where's the model? It simply disappeared from the front page.
I've tried many products over the years that have been instantly deleted because they were not good.
Yes, because getting technology to work properly is more difficult task than you think. It's like trying to turn inanimate rock into a living entity. You design what each part of the technology needs to do, write accurate code that implements the commands, and then your frankenstein monster will be alive. Once vampires have accepted the monster to be alive, there will be techdirt folks who still think it's a dead rock that cannot move. Even after significant amount of proof that the rock moves independently and makes decisions without being kicked, techdirt refuses to declare it a living thing. The proof is all around you, but you refuse to accept the truth. It's alive.
"I have 2 paying customers over the decade I've been whining here"
You missed the real news item. There's actually 437 suckers who downloaded the product. Either your claims that meshpage is useless does not hold, or we have over 400 people who got sucked into trying the offering...
This kind of numbers are simply not fitting the message that you want to spread around. Someone might conclude that meshpage is useful to real customers, if you focus on the real important numbers.
On the post: PUBG Corp. At It Again: Sues Garena, Apple, And Google For Copyright Infringement Over 'Free Fire' App
Re:
This must be biggest endorcement of meshpage than I've seen in a while. Everyone thinks blender is some kind of great software, and now you're claiming meshpage is equally good.
Sadly it's not actually true. There's only the graph data structure that works similarly to blender's graph data structure. And that's covered by the maze defense.
Everything else has no chance of substantial similarity problems.
On the post: PUBG Corp. At It Again: Sues Garena, Apple, And Google For Copyright Infringement Over 'Free Fire' App
Re:
Sure, but when problems happen with technology, whoever experiences the biggest problems will need to build technology that does not have those same problems. Thus meshpage/builder is creating animations like mickey mouse, but without the same problem than what original mickey mouse had. (its something to do with <30 fps animations, basically at least 60fps is required or humans cannot handle it properly for the flicker)
On the post: PUBG Corp. At It Again: Sues Garena, Apple, And Google For Copyright Infringement Over 'Free Fire' App
Re: Re: PUBG will win...
Mickey mouse accusation happens to be one of the most difficult problems in meshpage/builder. It was already recognized to be a problem in 2012, long before substantial development activity had happened. Basically mickey mouse animations have too strong effects to children watching those animations that disney cannot avoid copyright problems further down the line. Basically frame rate problem is also involved in this situation, and certain specific mickey mouse animation shown on television. It's completely outrageous for disney to put such programming on their animations meant for small children.
On the post: PUBG Corp. At It Again: Sues Garena, Apple, And Google For Copyright Infringement Over 'Free Fire' App
Re:
These strict rules only applies to your direct competitors. Not to the whole world. Your employees can use the rest of the world as they like, it's just direct competitors where you need to be extreamly careful with giving access to competitor products to your employees.
On the post: PUBG Corp. At It Again: Sues Garena, Apple, And Google For Copyright Infringement Over 'Free Fire' App
Re:
Yes, that's why my web page has actual copyright notices with credit flowing to the correct direction.
On the post: PUBG Corp. At It Again: Sues Garena, Apple, And Google For Copyright Infringement Over 'Free Fire' App
Re:
It's worse than that. In the end, your employees will think that the company brainwashed the employees and prevented them from doing their jobs properly.
But this is what is required. Copyright simply doesn't work properly unless you do some evil tricks.
Given that copyright is "negative" property, some employees are bound to feel that the rules they need to follow are too strict and prevents choosing the "best" solution from the available solutions. But best solution for single employee is not the best solution for the whole society. And copyright protects interests of the whole society against onslaught from individual people.
On the post: PUBG Corp. At It Again: Sues Garena, Apple, And Google For Copyright Infringement Over 'Free Fire' App
Re: Re: PUBG will win...
Good luck with that plan. My lawyers will surely respond to it with the following battery of arguments:
1) no access to blender or any works created with blender during development (The cave troll defense)
2) independently created via exploring the same maze from intel cpus (The maze defense)
3) Software was brought to stable base status before letting outside software ruin the copyright story (The stable base defense)
4) Remaining problems are math related (Mathematics is not copyrightable subject matter -defense)
5) Independently created without dependencies to infringing material (The independent creation -defense)
Basically, there's significant defenses available against your accusations.
On the post: PUBG Corp. At It Again: Sues Garena, Apple, And Google For Copyright Infringement Over 'Free Fire' App
Re:
To infringe the copyright, you just need some elements:
1) access to the previous work
2) some process that lifts elements from previous work to the new work
These are the only things needed. When companies give their employees access to competitor's products, it's already very dangerous activity copyright-wise. Once the access is granted, there's very small steps needed when it becomes illegal when all kinds of processes involving human brains or photographs or fullscale examination of the essential elements of the previous work will give rise to the copyright infringements.
Basically only way to protect against this is to ensure that your employees don't have access to competitor products.
On the post: PUBG Corp. At It Again: Sues Garena, Apple, And Google For Copyright Infringement Over 'Free Fire' App
Re:
Too bad it's not real forward movement, when the activity is based on copyright infringements. Proper innovation is actually fine-tuning the concept from beginning to the end. It just depends on the greatness of the development process whether you get successes out from it, not depending on who you ripped off of.
On the post: PUBG Corp. At It Again: Sues Garena, Apple, And Google For Copyright Infringement Over 'Free Fire' App
Re: Re: PUBG will win...
I must be doing something right, when anonymous cowards are calling me idiot.
On the post: The World Handled A 'Wordle' Ripoff Just Fine Without Any IP Action
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
But still the top100 most popular sites do not have 3d models available in their sites. Something must have failed in their 2000s implementation, so we have another chance of implementing it correctly.
On the post: PUBG Corp. At It Again: Sues Garena, Apple, And Google For Copyright Infringement Over 'Free Fire' App
PUBG will win...
There's no question about it, PUBG will win this fight. There's just too many similarities in the games. It's not just that they cloned all the gameplay ideas, but their feature list is almost the same in both games. Are they both using the same 3d engine, or why is competition of PUBG able to create the same scenes than what PUBG is displaying before end users had chance to play through PUBG's offering?
If they actually offered some original ideas, the competition wouldn't be able to quickly clone the material. It seems neither of the games deserve the publicity that they're getting, given that they failed to work hard enough to keep competition at its bay.
But legal entities are only looking at creation date, and whether the authors gave credit to the other party. Anything else is simply irrelevant and this is why PUBG will win this fight.
On the post: The World Handled A 'Wordle' Ripoff Just Fine Without Any IP Action
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Yes, I can't know all inside trading rules that exists in the stock market.
On the post: The World Handled A 'Wordle' Ripoff Just Fine Without Any IP Action
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
It's clearly a bug in the product, if users do not like it. Product developers are creating significant amount of features to their products to avoid the fate that users will reject it for no good reason.
On the post: The World Handled A 'Wordle' Ripoff Just Fine Without Any IP Action
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
This isn't required. The products are slightly illegal already at the time when they get popular among end users. My position is that all products on the planet are illegal in some ways. This is required feature before the product is able to get popularity.
On the post: The World Handled A 'Wordle' Ripoff Just Fine Without Any IP Action
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
We get decisions like this:
https://torrentfreak.com/adblocking-does-not-constitute-copyright-infringement-court-rules-220 118/
On the post: The World Handled A 'Wordle' Ripoff Just Fine Without Any IP Action
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
When comparing things, you should avoid the following:
1) comparing someone's work to the best work on the planet
2) comparing one person's work to the combined effort of a continent
3) comparing one person's work to a flexible assignment of authors
4) comparing output of different work amounts
5) comparing output based on popularity
6) comparing different time ranges, like 1700-1800 compared to 10 years of work by one person
7) etc--
You get the idea. Somehow the comparision is unfair if your comparision targets are not similar type.
You're better target than blender or maya, since you don't have 200 people working for you.
You should ask where's the model? It simply disappeared from the front page.
On the post: The World Handled A 'Wordle' Ripoff Just Fine Without Any IP Action
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Yes, because getting technology to work properly is more difficult task than you think. It's like trying to turn inanimate rock into a living entity. You design what each part of the technology needs to do, write accurate code that implements the commands, and then your frankenstein monster will be alive. Once vampires have accepted the monster to be alive, there will be techdirt folks who still think it's a dead rock that cannot move. Even after significant amount of proof that the rock moves independently and makes decisions without being kicked, techdirt refuses to declare it a living thing. The proof is all around you, but you refuse to accept the truth. It's alive.
On the post: The World Handled A 'Wordle' Ripoff Just Fine Without Any IP Action
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You missed the real news item. There's actually 437 suckers who downloaded the product. Either your claims that meshpage is useless does not hold, or we have over 400 people who got sucked into trying the offering...
This kind of numbers are simply not fitting the message that you want to spread around. Someone might conclude that meshpage is useful to real customers, if you focus on the real important numbers.
On the post: The World Handled A 'Wordle' Ripoff Just Fine Without Any IP Action
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
The statistics are slightly different than just zero users:
$6.00 Gross Revenue, 2 Payments, 2,302 Views, 437 Downloads, 17
Followers.
It's slightly more than 0 users.
Next >>