Xboxes may be banned In the US as well.

[theultimateend]

Ever since I first saw Han Solo blast out of Mos Eisley in the Falcon, I've wanted to be a smuggler. Guess now I'll get my chance.

That's the cutest first post I think I've ever seen here.

Sad to see nobody else has quoted you

If you can't make enough money in 28 years from the date of publication, let alone 56, you're either being greedy or you're too lazy to write a second book. Before 1978, you had to register a copyright for something to be protected in the first place, and it generally started at the date of publication, so theoretically you'd already be signed with a publisher and selling your book before it would be a problem.

As someone who has been published once and wants to be published again I agree with this sentiment .

At a certain point there needs to be incentive to write something new.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

Microsoft should just buy the patent from Motorola, there problem solved.

Why would Motorola ever sell the patent when they may have Microsoft over a barrel? Even if they did, they'd probably want a lot more than Microsoft thinks they should have to pay.

Considering they didn't think they even had to license it in the first place, I'm inclined to agree.

It's not that they think they shouldn't have to license it, it's that they either shouldn't have to pay to get it licesned, or they should only have to pay a pittance, thanks to an agreement Motorola signed when those patents were made a part of the h.264 spec.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

Microsoft should just buy the patent from Motorola, there problem solved.

Why would Motorola ever sell the patent when they may have Microsoft over a barrel? Even if they did, they'd probably want a lot more than Microsoft thinks they should have to pay.

I don't know, it just seemed like a much easier way to solve this problem than all this litigation bullshit with a lot fewer repercussions. Which isn't really saying much I suppose since pretty much any other means of solving this problem would be easier than this litigation bullshit.

 

[David Henshaw]

I live in the uk so it hasnt happened here , but If microsoft loses would that mean that there is no more xbox live service and no more games to buy online ? or would online service be shut down enterialy ?

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

I live in the uk so it hasnt happened here , but If microsoft loses would that mean that there is no more xbox live service and no more games to buy online ? or would online service be shut down enterialy ?

The problem is with a patented method used by the Xbox OS, as well as Windows 7 and at least one other Microsoft product (Internet Explorer? I can't remember) to decode h.264 video. It would be those three products, as well as anything else that directly violates the patent, which would be taken off the shelves. XboxLive is not one of those products.

Of course, the truth here is that this is a pissing match between Motorola and Microsoft over their respective smart phone businesses. Motorola broke a contract by charging Microsoft more than they did everyone else for use of that patent (they signed that contract as part of keeping the rights to those patents instead of sharing them with everyone when they were made a part of the h.264 codec), and Microsoft violated their patent in retaliation -- at which point Motorola tried to get their products pulled off the shelves.

 

[verdant monkai]

Will someone please explain the rivalry between Motorola and xbox, this is confusing me. Dont Motorola make phones anyway?
I wouldn't worry though everyone, Obama does not want to piss off Microsoft, since they make like half the computer stuff in the western world. I'm not good with this technical stuff but basically
This asshole David Shaw < Microsoft

 

[BartyMae]

While I agree copyright laws have gotten out of hand, I would go for up to the death of the author. I'm hoping on getting a book published in the future, and I think it would be rather tragic for someone to make a moderately successful piece when they're about 25, just to see it taken and rehashed and made much more successful and have to watch all that money flow into someone else's pocket (especially now with people saying the 10-20 year olds of today will probably be living easily into their 100s). Information does need to flow into the public domain, but authors and artists shouldn't have to bear witness to someone else making money off of their idea.

Do you really anticipate making money off your first published work in 56 years?

In other terms, do you really anticipate making money off your first published work when you're about 81?

There's a difference between not wanting to see your work exploited, (while alive), and thinking you can still make money off of it...

 

[TheGreatAndPowerfulZOG]

This is stupid, software patents really need to go.

And while we're at it, let's scrap all of our current IP laws and take them back to pre-1978 levels. 70 years after the author's death is obscene. 28 years from the date of publication plus another 28 if the work is renewed should be more than sufficient.

Edit: And by the way, even that is double what the original U.S. copyright law was. 14 years plus another 14 if the copyright is renewed would be wonderful.

Agreed. It's fucking absurd. I'm all for artists and authors profiting off their work, but it's just ridiculous now, especially since "fair use" apparently isn't a thing anymore.

 

[Something Amyss]

There's a difference between not wanting to see your work exploited, (while alive), and thinking you can still make money off of it...

*sigh* The same argument really applies, though "exploited" is a pretty loaded word here.

 

[boag]

You know how there was the whole Microsoft vs Motorola thing is Germany? Well, it seems the same is happening in the US now.

http://gamepolitics.com/2012/05/22/judge-recommends-import-ban-xbox-360

Basically Judge David Shaw recommended that the International Trade Commision ban both the 4GB and 250 GB consoles (slim versions) be banned in the US.

So, what are people's thoughts on this then?

I want this to happen just for the sake of this stupid patent law to be taken into the most ridiculous terroritory possible.

I want someone to patent an air induction system that works as the human respiratory system, so that they can charge people for the air they breathe.

 

[Gnoekeos]

This is stupid, software patents really need to go.

And while we're at it, let's scrap all of our current IP laws and take them back to pre-1978 levels. 70 years after the author's death is obscene. 28 years from the date of publication plus another 28 if the work is renewed should be more than sufficient.

Edit: And by the way, even that is double what the original U.S. copyright law was. 14 years plus another 14 if the copyright is renewed would be wonderful.

Nah, should remove copyright laws altogether. Information wants to be free, and all that.

Information doesn't want to be free. Information wants to hunt!

 

[Bassanova]

I find this quite sad. As of about a year ago, I exclusively play on my PS3, but only because I don't have an Xbox too. I think this is ridiculous, and what would happen if it got banned in the US? No frat-boy or CoD junkie would stand for it. Trust me, the Justice system doesn't have the balls they think they have to ban as popular an item as this.

 

[Atmos Duality]

While I agree copyright laws have gotten out of hand, I would go for up to the death of the author. I'm hoping on getting a book published in the future, and I think it would be rather tragic for someone to make a moderately successful piece when they're about 25, just to see it taken and rehashed and made much more successful and have to watch all that money flow into someone else's pocket (especially now with people saying the 10-20 year olds of today will probably be living easily into their 100s). Information does need to flow into the public domain, but authors and artists shouldn't have to bear witness to someone else making money off of their idea.

Anyway, as others have said, break out the popcorn. This is going to get interesting.

IMO, 14 years is more than enough time to make plenty of money, especially in such a fast paced culture. If you're relying on sequels to that work 15 years later (I concede that books may take time to write, depending on the author...*grumbles about George R.R. Martin*), wouldn't people be more inclined to purchase the official, canonical sequel to that work even in the presence of imitators and ripoffs?

And if you somehow manage to pen one of the Great American Classics for the future, you're already going to be rolling in the dough; people will come to YOU for all manner of things. The Harry Potter series is about 14 years old right now, and it's already propelled Rowling into a position as one of the most wealthy women IN THE WORLD.

There's a difference between not wanting to see your work exploited, (while alive), and thinking you can still make money off of it...

Exploitation runs rampant under CURRENT IP laws; in movies books and even TV shows.
Or am I just imagining all of these retarded Vampire shows all trying to cash in on the Twatlight Twilight craze?

 

[Tanner The Monotone]

I doubt this will happen. You know how many people would lose their jobs if Xbox lost its biggest market?

This is the argument that they should have used.

 

[evilneko]

Motorola claims that the Xbox 360 uses ?Motorola-developed technology that allows set-top boxes to decode transmissions between its Droid2 and DroidX mobile devices? while Microsoft argues that Motorola refused ?to abide by requirements set by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Standards Association to set reasonable license fees of essential technology.

A little late for microsoft to be complaining now. They must have written a contract accepting that Motorola were going to develop a patent for there own transmission device. The whole case just seems to be about Microsoft worming out of paying their dues. The judge is right, they should honor their deals or GTFO.

Microsoft ain't the only one trying to weasel out of shit: http://www.androidauthority.com/microsoft-patent-motorola-infringement-activesync-import-ban-87157/

Sheesh this shit goes back for years: http://techcrunch.com/2010/11/10/motorola-strikes-back-sues-microsoft-for-infringement-of-16-patents/

And they wonder why so many people rightly see software patents as a bad thing...

 

[CAPTCHA]

Microsoft should just buy the patent from Motorola, there problem solved. Or better yet, why doesn't Microsoft just buy out Motorola?

I think you've hit the nail on the head here. That's exactly what's going to happen (buying the patent). Motorola have got them over the barrel however. I'm guessing that the initial buyout price was too high for their liking, so Motorola are upping the licence fees to force the issue - hence the court case. Business is only fair when it's working in your favor I guess.

 

[esperandote]

Microsoft will hold the fight until the 720 is out and it doesn't mattter any more.

For what i understand the will just ban the sale of new consoles, all services will be available for old xbox consoles and slim one already sold. maybe they could restar making elite consoles.

 

[NightHawk21]

I'm actually curious how this is will turn out. I could be wrong, but I though sony had more hold in Europe so the banning of xbox in germany while a big financial hit is not that big a deal, but (and again I could be wrong), xbox is the dominant console in the US isn't it. That would be a scary market to lose.

 

[James Joseph Emerald]

There's a difference between not wanting to see your work exploited, (while alive), and thinking you can still make money off of it...

*sigh* The same argument really applies, though "exploited" is a pretty loaded word here.

I think you've got a pretty narrow view on the issue. If copyright had such a relatively short time limit, companies like Marvel, DC Comics, Nintendo and many other companies that rely on established characters and IPs would take a big hit to their profitability.

It's all well and good in the case of one person who writes a popular book/song/film, but companies last for many generations and need to have a way to protect their own brands in order to be stable and future-proof. Nobody would want to invest in a company whose property becomes open to public looting in twenty-eight years, by law.