Grand Theft Auto Parent Company Files Patent for 'System And Method For Virtual Navigation In A Gami

Comments

• Scot Member LegendaryPosts: 24,273

  January 2021

  Geek Heaven.
• Wizardry Member LegendaryPosts: 19,332

  January 2021 edited January 2021

  It sounds like total BS to me.They are trying to word it in a way to confuse the copyright people into just saying "we don't understand but ok".
  
  TakeTwo would then manipulate the wording to try and control a large portion of the node/pathfinding ideas used in games and try and lay claim to almost anything and everything that uses pathfinding nodes which is like every game.
  This reminds me a lot of Hasbro who hires the best lawyers in the land and spends literally everyday trying to copyright/patent something and anything.
  Big business trying to CONTROL the market and others is what we need LESS of.I hope the people left in charge to award copyright/patents have a shred of intelligence and tell Take Two to TAKE a HIKE.

  

  Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
  
  
• Po_gg Member EpicPosts: 5,749

  January 2021

  Patent or not, I'd rather point at the screenshot... an underwater car painted as shark.

  It's not Saint's Row with its wacky humor, over-the-top silliness, superpowers and dildos, it's still the "serious" GTA.
  

  I guess everything for the sales, cash over immersion
  

  
• Wizardry Member LegendaryPosts: 19,332

  January 2021 edited January 2021

  This same Take Two has been in lawsuits for violating copyright material and fighting against it full heartedly,well because they have lots of money to do it.
  How do you liek the world of gaming,SUPER easy to get your cotnent a copyright strike but VERY difficult when trying to prove copyright infringement agaisnt the developers.
  
  So on one shoe you are pretty much instantly guilty as charged but when the shoe is on the other foot you have to fight the developer in court,funny how big business always wins.
  
  I remember about 10 years ago in Canada they were going to create law that restricted big business from using low ball tactics like copyright laws to BULLY people around.In essence the courts could enforce an injuction against big business which would put them now under strict rules or be fined and put the defendants out of harms reach of that developer/big bbusiness.
  
  Sadly years later and it looks like big business is still as scummy as ever and the average citizen is still easy fodder to copyright claims and bullying.
  
  So if you can't see the bigger picture,a SMALL game studio using some scripted path nodes/trees could be bullied by Take Two and have no way of fighting them in courts.
  
  

  

  Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
  
  
• Daranar Member UncommonPosts: 392

  January 2021

  This is total garbage. Hope to God this gets denied. Game instructions are not supposed to be copyrightable. While snippets of code can be and new technology can be. This seems more like a generic game instruction set. Overly complicated and wordy to sound complicated but rather generic instructions of how to handle pathing.
  
  It's scary to think this is even valid as copyrighted content. While I didn't read every word or overly study the diagrams, I did skim the full document and it looks like the sole intent of this is for copyright bullying as Wizardry alluded to.

  If I want a world in which people can purchase success and power with cash, I'll play Real Life. Keep Virtual Worlds Virtual!

  
  
• Astropuyo Member RarePosts: 2,178

  January 2021

  Take two can fuck it self.