Jump to content

Ankular

Crusader
  • Content Count

    6
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5 Neutral

About Ankular

  • Rank
    Moppet

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    EST

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. While I admit I've never read even a translation of Japan's pertinent Patent and Copyright laws, I have followed the US Patent, Copyright and Trade Secret legal shenanigans very closely. I've also been involved first hand with internal enforcement of a corporation's Copyright and Trade Secret procedures. Copy/paste is always under Copyright. Never under Patents. Lawyers involved in Patent and Copyright cases often try to mix these two in an effort to confuse Patent Offices and juries into finding for simply wrong patents/judgments. This is an especially huge problem for the US Patent office and results in many patents being granted that should never have existed. I can't imagine that Japan's Patent Office doesn't suffer from the same issue. In general, lawyers that work on applying for patents try to obfuscate the application to make as broad a claim as possible in order to later sue companies. It's part of their standard business tactic. This is worst with non-manufacturing companies which buy or apply for patents. If you see news of a patent holding company initiating a lawsuit, this is almost always involves a patent that should never have been granted. TL:DR cheat sheet of terms: Intellectual Property: This is not valid legal term/phrase in any country. It originated as a term by Patent and Copyright lawyers in the US specifically designed to mix the legal concepts behind Patents and Copyrights. Any and every lawyer claiming Intellectual Property rights (especially in any kind of legal document) is trying to pull a fast one. This is always true. Patents: State (country) issued, limited time grants to exclusive manufacturing rights of a tangible (results in a physical object) idea. This is why patents are never valid for mathematical algorithms. This is also why computer programs cannot be patented despite the many, many Patent Lawyers who attempt to do so. In the US, the Supreme Court has historically always invalidated these Patents. Granting of these Patents by the Patent Office has always been the result of the applying Patent Lawyer successfully confusing the Patent Office. Copyrights: State (country) issued, limited time grants to exclusive distribution of specific expressions (think 'copy/paste') of an idea. Entertainment performances have special treatment under Copyright. Trade Marks: State (country) issued, conditionally time unlimited, exclusive grants to a registered 'mark' used for identification. There is wide latitude of what can constitute a 'mark', but they must meet very specific conditions. i.e. common words are excluded. Trade Secrets: This is the only non-state, unlimited time right. Only comes into play when taking legal action against corporate espionage. To use this legal right, you have to prove in court that you/your company made a 'good faith' effort to keep a secret (restricted access). Hint: if you don't shred your documents and merely throw them out, you've lost your case. Always.
  2. "a controller-vibrating feature when enemies are nearby" Seriously? SERIOUSLY?!!! This was considered patent-able? Ludicrous! The entire point of the vibrator in the controller is to provide in-game feedback. It's part of the general purpose design. Patents on specific in-game feedback scenarios is absolutely insane. Seems like Japan's patent environment is just as bad as in the US.
  3. I'm here because I followed a link in nyaa to possibly score the Robotics;Notes 720p series at MEGA (if it's still up). We're a very small group (1 lead and 2 friends) active on a catch as catch can basis. We're not conversationalists so expect limited interaction. Regards to All!
×