Design Con 2015
Breaking News
News & Analysis

Cloud gaming patent arrives--after 8 years

12/14/2010 02:22 PM EST
28 comments
NO RATINGS
Page 1 / 2 Next >
More Related Links
View Comments: Oldest First | Newest First | Threaded View
<<   <   Page 3 / 3
nineman
User Rank
Rookie
re: Cloud gaming patent arrives--after 8 years
nineman   12/16/2010 2:34:32 PM
NO RATINGS
Axel do you not realise that "given the technology of today" is a rather bogus starting point for knocking something invented and disclosed in a patent application eight years ago? I didn't intend to make any assessment of the patent's quality: You're dead right that proper standards of inventiveness need to be established and upheld by the examiners. USPTO examination has been rather poor in past decades, IMHO, and this patent may be an example to illustate that. however, USPTO is nowadays likely to be too strict, which is just as bad, if not worse (Google 'post KSR', if you want further reading.) Your last comment is misleading, however: patents are absolutely not mandatory to prevent other people patenting your own ideas: all you need to do is publish your idea to protect it from being patented by others. Companies that file patents also regularly use this 'defensive publiation' technique, for innovations that they don't want to patent, or that they deem are not inventive enough.

wilber_xbox
User Rank
Manager
re: Cloud gaming patent arrives--after 8 years
wilber_xbox   12/19/2010 12:26:20 PM
NO RATINGS
so many comments and not much time to read all of them. I surly know the importance of protecting the IP for tech industry. But if a single patent takes 8 or so years to get passed then i think we need some reforms to get things done faster.

Phluph
User Rank
Rookie
re: Cloud gaming patent arrives--after 8 years
Phluph   12/10/2012 9:25:17 PM
NO RATINGS
What's our experience with the USPTO? Er, how about slow as molasses in in January. We filed a patent application in Oct. 2007 and did not get a review of it until Sept. of this year! As is typical for 1st round through the system, several claims were objected to by the Examiner. For the 2 valid concerns the USPTO Examiner expressed we have clarified the (very substantial) differences and pretty much rebutted the rest of their objections cited as not even having anything to do with our application or methods described in it. Now to see how long it takes for the re-examination....

<<   <   Page 3 / 3
Radio
LATEST ARCHIVED BROADCAST
EE Times Senior Technical Editor Martin Rowe will interview EMC engineer Kenneth Wyatt.
Top Comments of the Week
Like Us on Facebook

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed
Flash Poll