WotC Strikes Again: Patents the CSG

[Ranger REG]

I'm starting to build a healthy disliking of wotc. First the elimination of Dragon and Dungeon. Now they try to kill their competitors with law suits and frivolous patents. Nice bunch of guys- not.

They're not killing them. They just want them to pay tributes for a little while.

"What is best in life, WotC?"

"To crush your competitions, To see them driven before you, and hear the lamentation of their fans."

 

[SteveC]

Yes, Transformers hit the shelves this week.

That being said, the patent is for the "Punch Bots" game that was never released.

That is unfortunate. This has the potential to become VERY ugly. I know that the gaming scene out in Seattle is close knit, and people from one company often game with people from another. I hope that this isn't a case of someone from one company saying "hey, here's this cool new idea we're working on..." and then the other company trying to run with it as well.

Not good at all.

:\

--Steve

 

[jezter6]

For anyone (like me) who likes to read the fun stuff, here's a link to the actual patent:

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-...50&s1=7201374.PN.&OS=PN/7201374&RS=PN/7201374

 

[MerricB]

I'm starting to build a healthy disliking of wotc. First the elimination of Dragon and Dungeon. Now they try to kill their competitors with law suits and frivolous patents. Nice bunch of guys- not.

That's true of most of the bigger companies: Games Workshop and WizKids come to mind.

Cheers!

 

[Glyfair]

That's true of most of the bigger companies: Games Workshop and WizKids come to mind.

I don't know of any significant lawsuits WizKids has been involved in. Not that they wouldn't, just that they haven't.

BTW, Ryan Dancey has just weighed in on the issue.

 

[RFisher]

The following is mostly speculation, but I do have some familiarity with patent law. Note that I am operating on the assumption that, while wotc may have only most recently mailed wizkids about the patent on the 21st, wizkids has probably been aware of the impending patent grant for years.

[...details...]

It's just this kind of maneuvering & lack of straightforwardness that can get me very depressed & cynical about the world.

Re: Mr. Dancey's observations...

The argument that patents increase consumer choice seems reasonable but when you look at the evidence, the case for them decreasing choice is stronger. Maybe patents do have a net positive effect, but that's far from clear.

Personally, I think the gaming industry is better off with its lesser use of patent law. Other industries are plagued by companies that don't actually produce anything but merely collect patents--in ways that reward the original inventor the least--to collect royalties on. They hamper the innovators who are trying to build on previous discoveries much more than they encourage inventors.

Certainly patents are one of the least-bad forms of intellectual property law, but I remain unconvinced that they are good.

And on a side-note: Monopolies were bad long, long before Microsoft was a gleam in Mr. Gates's eye. Even if--like all things--they aren't all bad.

 

[S'mon]

A patent grant from the USPTO means almost nothing these days, their philosophy is to grant any old garbage and let litigation decide if it's a valid patent or not. It sounds like this one may not be but I'm sure WotC-Hasbro will be glad of the chilling effect on competitors, so they may not be keen to litigate and risk probably losing it.

 

[GoodKingJayIII]

I'm starting to build a healthy disliking of wotc. First the elimination of Dragon and Dungeon. Now they try to kill their competitors with law suits...

Wait a minute, wait a minute... Wizkids filed the suit, not WotC. As for "frivolous patents," well I guess it's easy for anyone to say something is bogus. But I'm sure the lawyers and patent clerks who spent countless hours working on it might disagree with you.

 

[Imaro]

Wait a minute, wait a minute... Wizkids filed the suit, not WotC. As for "frivolous patents," well I guess it's easy for anyone to say something is bogus. But I'm sure the lawyers and patent clerks who spent countless hours working on it might disagree with you.

That (mostly uninformed) debate is driven by the events of the summer of 1997, when Wizards of the Coast was awarded US Patent RE37,957, which defined the “Trading card game method of play” (essentially, a basic patent on the concept of trading card games in general). Following the grant of that patent, Wizards sent notices to every publisher in gaming who had a CCG on the market telling them that they intended to collect royalties on the sale of CCGs and establishing a rate schedule.

You're telling me with WotC's previous maneuvers, you wouldn't? Really read the Ryan Dancey reply in full, WizKids is trying to cover their proverbial backs before WotC goes for the backstab. Sorry I can't fault them at all for this.

 

[Reynard]

Interestingly, a quick look at PotSM on Wikipedia shows that the game was essentially designed by ex-Wizards employees -- ones who could very well have worked on or at least knew of the "Punch Bots" project and decided to use the idea.

This is, of course, why we have patents, so your employees can't jump ship and screw you by beating you to market.