When will we see the first RPG patent?

[caudor]

An interesting topic.

Who, aside from Hasbro/WotC, would have the funds and inclination to patent RPGs? I can't think of anyone off hand. However, if someone actually does (and tries to defend it) then that could spell real trouble for us in our closed, comfortable RPG world.

Psionicist, have you been hanging out at Slashdot.com?

 

[Ranger REG]

An interesting topic.

Who, aside from Hasbro/WotC, would have the funds and inclination to patent RPGs? I can't think of anyone off hand. However, if someone actually does (and tries to defend it) then that could spell real trouble for us in our closed, comfortable RPG world.

Psionicist, have you been hanging out at Slashdot.com?

I know that WotC did patented the use of tapping for card games.

To patent RPG would be a herculean task, but to patent a method within a RPG may be possible if it's original.

Mind you, that patent have a short life (what? 25 years?) before anyone else can freely enjoy putting common application to it without paying tributes to the patent owner.

 

[wingsandsword]

The problem is what is called "Prior Art", if somebody has done it before a patent can be disproved and invalidated. For something to be patented it has to be novel and not obvious. Almost any idea in RPG's is not novel, and if somebody wanted to fight it they'd have a pile of prior art claims. Within the US at least, the Constitution lays out the actual legal foundation of copyright and patent law, and specifies it is to protect the creator/inventor of the discovery, not the first person to rush to the patent office on something they haven't actually invented yet and wait for somebody to invent it so they can profit. There's a huge gulf between what people file and never gets challenged, and what actually goes before a judge and argued.

The patent office has the general policy of granting any patent filed, even ones they know are dubious. They only reject patents outright on things they consider utterly impossible (perpetual motion for example). Their standing policy is whenever in doubt, grant it and let the courts sort it out.

For example, I wish I could recall the details, but a pharmaceutical company that saw that the patent on one of their medications was about to expire, filed for a new patent on one of the metabolites of that drug, that is: a chemical your body produces after taking the medication, and they patented it to prevent anybody else from making that medication because once consumed it the patient's body would produce a substance they patented. It didn't hold up in court when challenged, but they filed it.

In another case, Smuckers patented the peanut butter & jelly sandwich, so that no other company could rival their sold prepackaged PB&J sandwiches, and that patent was thrown out with a very strongly worded opinion from the judges when it went to court. The idea of pinching the crusts closed on a sandwich couldn't be patented, the courts held. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7432980/). That news article also claims that only about 65% of patent claims are actually approved.

Could somebody file a claim to patent RPG's? Yes.
Could that patent get approved? Maybe.
Could that person get a lot of (bad) publicity and noise by threatening to sue everybody unless they paid him royalties on everything? Yes.
Would that patent hold up in court if it was challenged (If WotC tried it, White Wolf would lead the charge, doubtless, if anybody else tried it, WotC would lead the charge)? No, there are pretty blatant decades or prior art claims.

Patenting a genetically engineered creature is one thing, that's a patent on something that took work and effort. I'm a little wary of patenting genetically engineered creatures, but that's at least technology of some kind.

Patenting software algorithims is at least a novel mathematical concept, some bit of discovery or development. Again, I'm against software patents, but there was at least some R&D that went into the concept.

Patenting RPG concepts is trying to claim exclusive rights to something you not only didn't develop, but may have been around for longer than the patent lawyer you may be dealing with. Imagine the pile of books entered as evidence, Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson giving testimony that they first developed the medium, with possible claims leading back to wargames of antiquity or theatrical groups.

The CCG patent was on the idea of specifically denoting status of a card by orienting it, not on the concept of a card game played with randomly distributed trading cards, not on distributing cards randomly, and to be honest, the "tapping" mechanic was unique at the time; Magic was innovative at the time.

If, big if, somebody comes up with a radical new idea that completely changes the industry, some new method that completely changes the gaming industry, then that could be patented. Something as revolutionary as WizKids "clicky" bases or Magic's "tapping" mechanic.

Edit: Obligitory I Am Not A Lawyer, just a well read layman who keeps abreast of the issue.

 

[wedgeski]

Interesting question. The prior art issue weighs heavily against anyone trying to patent existing RPG mechanics; even though it all usually comes down to 'rolling a die', there are so many different variants of fundamentally the same basic rules and systems that the game as it stands today is probably safe.

I also find it hard to imagine anyone inventing something radical enough in the future that a patent would be [a] awarded and defensible. You're going to be moving into the realms of holo-decks and immersive VR before the RPG undergoes a step change of that magnitude.

I totally agree with the absurdity of the current system and someone really needs to fire a rocket up somebody's patent office. I am hopeful, though, that in the software realm in particular, there will soon be a test case that causes the whole software patent joke to be uncovered for what it is.

It could also be said that any license is really a patent by another means. WotC effectively patented the d20 system by granting free use of the mechanics under certain guildelines. This neatly pre-empts any attempt by another developer in the future to create a system that is simply 'd20 by any other name'; there is nothing to be gained by doing so when you can simply use the SRD as the basis for your game. I had several thoughts along this line during the whole 'WHFRP is derivative of D&D' debate that raged on this board last week.

 

[S'mon]

i believe that whoever invented the patent system should be caned. forget atom bombs and terrorism... this is the real bane of the world!!!

The patent system was fine until someone in the US, in the patent office I think, decided to allow filing patents for everything and anything & let the courts sort it out. This was a deliberate decision to screw up the patents system on the basis that the more patents the better, no matter how trivial.

 

[Spell]

The patent system was fine until someone in the US, in the patent office I think, decided to allow filing patents for everything and anything & let the courts sort it out. This was a deliberate decision to screw up the patents system on the basis that the more patents the better, no matter how trivial.

ok, so i'll rephrase it. that guy who started this senseless stuff should be caned.

 

[Umbran]

Yes, but it's costly. Large companies can afford it, I can't.

They can afford it only if the potential profit is large enough. Large companies won't sue you to defend their patent unless you're actually making money off the thing - and the larger the company, the larger the amount of money you have to make to get noticed.

And then - patent infringement is merely a civil matter. If you lose, you merely owe the patent owner a cut of the profits, kind of as if you'd licensed the thing to begin with.

 

[Psionicist]

They can afford it only if the potential profit is large enough. Large companies won't sue you to defend their patent unless you're actually making money off the thing - and the larger the company, the larger the amount of money you have to make to get noticed.

And then - patent infringement is merely a civil matter. If you lose, you merely owe the patent owner a cut of the profits, kind of as if you'd licensed the thing to begin with.

Yes, but now you're assuming the large company filed the patent _and_ invented the idea (not that "invent" and "idea" are two words you should use in the same sentence...).

What if I code something for Linux, something blatantly obvious. And then Microsoft patents the idea a couple of years later, despite my prior art (this happens all the time). Then they use their patents in anti-Linux campaigns, claiming that Linux "possibly infringe on thousands of our patents and we can't guarantee your small companys safety if you use their un-american product". What can I do about it? Even If I get a lawyer, Microsoft's Army Of Undead will just out-lawyer me. And they still have lots of patents that will be left unchallanged. Even if I get the rights to my patent Microsoft will figure out something so they don't have to give me a dime.

Apply this to the RPG industry. Hasbro/WotC are probably wealthy enough to file lots of patents despite prior art. Even if they don't actually enforce the patents you have the fear, uncertainty and doubt as a smaller publisher. What IF they will try to enforce the patents? Can you afford to stay days in court to defend yourself? What about your day job and family? What if a really successful RPG created by a small company threatens WotC's D&D sales? They have the patents and they can probably use them, even if they will lose a few of the battles.

 

[WayneLigon]

Unfortunately, the American company was willing to litigate to enforce its "property" and so now, most shops selling ugg boots simply label them ug boots instead.

That's when you need to start throwing some lawyers on the barby....

I think if it were possible to patent any aspect of RPG's, Lorraine Wiseman would have found a way to do it.

 

[Keeper of Secrets]

I'm gonna patent how you spread toast on bread... and restaurants around the world will pay me 0.001 cent per slice!

Actually there is a huge fight raging on now with Smuckers trying to patent a little treat they have out. Maybe you have seen the ads for a little sandwich with peanut butter and jelly inside. It is like a tiny pie. They make a sandwich and use a circular cutter to chop off the crusts (which kids seem to hate) and seals the sides. They want to patent it. The patent office says no. Smuckers took it to court and it is still waiting a decision.

I'm not a patent attorney but I am a copyright/trademark attorney and their argument makes a lot of sense even though the other side makes a lot of sense, too.

As far as RPGs, you can't patent the game, itself but you could likely patent the system. Though with OGL at this point any chance to patent THAT is lost. On the other hand, the systems usually have enough protection with copyright and trademarks that you can just use those. Besides, a patent only lasts 17 years and it takes about three years to actually get an approval that it just isn't worth it. Copyrights and trademarks get you much more 'value' for their money.