Xboxes may be banned In the US as well.

[James Joseph Emerald]

It's always the fucking Anglos that pull that shit too. Brits, Aussies, but not the Irish. Irish are pretty cool on the internet.

If you're from Ireland, good on ya.

That's not true. I'm Irish and I'm not cool on the Internet...

Besides, you're talking about companies that take away the IP rights of the authors. Why should I feel bad for them? Why should anyone? You accuse me of a narrow viewpoint, yet there is no real reason to feel sympathy. These are the exact industries that are creating a harmfulenvironment in the first place.

Not really, I'm talking about companies in general. I just thought you'd sympathise with the comics example.

It's very reductive and narrow-minded to automatically assume that physical objects are subject to all the laws of ownership, but designs, concepts, characters, virtual objects and works of art belong to the world, no matter how hard their original creators worked on them and want to keep them.

And companies aren't inherently soulless. Anyone can start a company based around their IP, and many do. I think intellectual property is as valid as physical property, and attempts to force people to give up their IPs is equivalent to forcing them to give away all their outdated products for free to whoever wants them, just because people feel entitled to it.

 

[triggrhappy94]

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.

This.
I've already offered to ship American games to Australia for (depending on what shipping and exchange looks like) a fraction of the price you'd normally end up buying them at from Australian stores.

 

[superbatranger]

so i have to kiss my 360 goodbye

I doubt they'll go after people who already have a 360. It would be too difficult.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

so i have to kiss my 360 goodbye

I doubt they'll go after people who already have a 360. It would be too difficult.

This won't affect people who already own one at all, it'll only prevent new ones from being sold. Patent law doesn't work in a way that lets that happen, at least not to consumer goods.

 

[Jormala]

If you go read what the patents are, you'll be asking the universe: WTF?
Seriously those patents are retarded, they basically go like this:
Dis patent be about all audio encoding methods and whatnot, you know liek audio and stuffz.

And there's almost 10 of those that are both about audio and video, and all encoders/decoders novadays use the methods, but Motorola ain't doing anything about them...

 

[ServebotFrank]

Isn't it bad for the consumer though? If the 360 was banned in the U.S. than game companies would stop producing for the 360 and anyone who just so happened to have bought a 360 would be screwed and would have to go buy a PS3 or Wii.

There's also the fact that this will put alot of people out of the job. Surely the U.S. has been trying to keep jobs up?

 

[MercurySteam]

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.

Pretty much this. Though when patent laws cause crap like this it makes it hard to believe that they don't need to be re-drafted.

 

[Something Amyss]

Not really, I'm talking about companies in general. I just thought you'd sympathise with the comics example.

Companies reliant on taking the IPs of others and making millions off of them. The sort of Exploitation that was the fear of the poster I'd originally replied to. The sort of companies that make sure authors and musicians and artists stay impoverished or have to file for bankruptcy.

Remind me why you think I'd be sympathetic? Especially as a would-be author myself?

It's very reductive and narrow-minded to automatically assume that physical objects are subject to all the laws of ownership, but designs, concepts, characters, virtual objects and works of art belong to the world, no matter how hard their original creators worked on them and want to keep them.

Hope that's not applied to me, because I never said that.

And companies aren't inherently soulless.[/quote]

Again, not something I said, so I hoped that wasn't aimed at me.

Anyone can start a company based around their IP, and many do. I think intellectual property is as valid as physical property, and attempts to force people to give up their IPs is equivalent to forcing them to give away all their outdated products for free to whoever wants them, just because people feel entitled to it.

Intellectual property is more protected than physical property. Nowhere else is someone granted such unilateral control of an item once they have sold it. And it really matters little if someone can make a company based on their IP, that's not the type of company that fits the examples you used, the type I was arguing about here. The people who would be hurt by this ARE the long-term ones who are large corporate entities relying on the same IPs for decades. The example of time given covers most of an adult lifespan and is hardly consequential to the types you are now bringing up. Do you really think Sherlock Holmes should be a protected character right now?

 

[spartan231490]

microsoft is too powerful in the us, this probs won't happen. Still might buy a slim now just in case.

 

[JoesshittyOs]

This is stupid, and it won't happen. next controversy.

 

[Terminate421]

This is bad. In all honesty, this is bad. There is no way they can ban a product like this that is this big.

This is why patents need to be fixed for modern times.

 

[AstylahAthrys]

There is no way that could happen, right? Like, it's something that's theoretically possible but nobody would actually go through with it? Right? Please tell me I'm right.

 

[DudeistBelieve]

There is no way that could happen, right? Like, it's something that's theoretically possible but nobody would actually go through with it? Right? Please tell me I'm right.

I really wouldn't worry about it, this is just a situation of greed and Motorala and Microsoft being in a battle of "whip it out, lets see who's dick is bigger."

If Microsoft loses, they'll reluctantly hand over buckets of money to use the product and Xboxes will be unbanned. Which, of course, Motorala will accept because if they're known as the company that killed the Xbox they're brand reputation will be tarnished amongst consumers.

so worst case scenario? it might be hard getting an xbox for a few months. But there will still be games and shit.

 

[Lunar Templar]

my thoughts? laughter, that kind the a bound person would need to be very concerned over

so i have to kiss my 360 goodbye

i highly doubt any ones gonna come after your 360 dood, but you might not be able to buy another

 

[Terminate421]

I tried to care, but i'm too busy not being american, playing Diablo 3 on my PC

Thanks to you, I cannot wait for the next time they have to close servers for maintenance

Don't post if it doesn't matter.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

This is stupid, software patents really need to go. I think there was recently a ruling in the UK that invalidates/diminishes them, but unfortunately nothing worldwide yet.

Did you just say software patents need to go? Considering we live in a capitalist society, removing software patents would be fucking dumb. Not calling you an idiot. Just... Did you really think that it would be a good thing if we lived without patents?

I mean, you are basically saying all software should be freeware. Which would cause the total collapse of a hell of a lot of companies. Including ones you like.

that said? This particular case is fucking dumb. But saying that we should be without patents is like saying.... I dunno. "Theres a fire in central New York! What we really need is a Tsunami"

No, software patents are a legitimately bad thing. Software copyright can be defended, but software patents are for things like "program which allows an applet to open in a web browser without first being clicked on," and they can be registered while the company doing it has absolutely no clue as to how to implement it. The example I gave was a real patent, by the way. You might recognize it as the reason you had to click on every flash application you opened in Internet Explorer 6.

 

[Grygor]

This is stupid, software patents really need to go. I think there was recently a ruling in the UK that invalidates/diminishes them, but unfortunately nothing worldwide yet.

Did you just say software patents need to go? Considering we live in a capitalist society, removing software patents would be fucking dumb. Not calling you an idiot. Just... Did you really think that it would be a good thing if we lived without patents?

I mean, you are basically saying all software should be freeware. Which would cause the total collapse of a hell of a lot of companies. Including ones you like.

that said? This particular case is fucking dumb. But saying that we should be without patents is like saying.... I dunno. "Theres a fire in central New York! What we really need is a Tsunami"

No, software patents are a legitimately bad thing. Software copyright can be defended, but software patents are for things like "program which allows an applet to open in a web browser without first being clicked on," and they can be registered while the company doing it has absolutely no clue as to how to implement it. The example I gave was a real patent, by the way. You might recognize it as the reason you had to click on every flash application you opened in Internet Explorer 6.

Nah, software patents are totally justifiable.

The REAL issue is that the patent office isn't capable of properly evaluating them - they have no sense of what "prior art" is, or what is obvious and therefore unpatentable. Largely because software patents are generally evaluated by mathematicians, not computer scientists or programmers.

In other words, the real problem with software patents is patent office incompetence.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

This is stupid, software patents really need to go. I think there was recently a ruling in the UK that invalidates/diminishes them, but unfortunately nothing worldwide yet.

Did you just say software patents need to go? Considering we live in a capitalist society, removing software patents would be fucking dumb. Not calling you an idiot. Just... Did you really think that it would be a good thing if we lived without patents?

I mean, you are basically saying all software should be freeware. Which would cause the total collapse of a hell of a lot of companies. Including ones you like.

that said? This particular case is fucking dumb. But saying that we should be without patents is like saying.... I dunno. "Theres a fire in central New York! What we really need is a Tsunami"

No, software patents are a legitimately bad thing. Software copyright can be defended, but software patents are for things like "program which allows an applet to open in a web browser without first being clicked on," and they can be registered while the company doing it has absolutely no clue as to how to implement it. The example I gave was a real patent, by the way. You might recognize it as the reason you had to click on every flash application you opened in Internet Explorer 6.

Nah, software patents are totally justifiable.

The REAL issue is that the patent office isn't capable of properly evaluating them - they have no sense of what "prior art" is, or what is obvious and therefore unpatentable. Largely because software patents are generally evaluated by mathematicians, not computer scientists or programmers.

In other words, the real problem with software patents is patent office incompetence.

If you want to go there, the real real problem is that the patent office is no longer funded by the government, and is instead entirely funded by the registration fee for new patents. They kind of have a vested interest in /not/ denying any new patents.

 

[DudeistBelieve]

This is stupid, software patents really need to go. I think there was recently a ruling in the UK that invalidates/diminishes them, but unfortunately nothing worldwide yet.

Did you just say software patents need to go? Considering we live in a capitalist society, removing software patents would be fucking dumb. Not calling you an idiot. Just... Did you really think that it would be a good thing if we lived without patents?

I mean, you are basically saying all software should be freeware. Which would cause the total collapse of a hell of a lot of companies. Including ones you like.

that said? This particular case is fucking dumb. But saying that we should be without patents is like saying.... I dunno. "Theres a fire in central New York! What we really need is a Tsunami"

Perhaps Patent reform? (I must admit, I've never been comfortable with the thought that one can lay claim to an idea.)

And while you're right to a degree, sir, freeware would not compute with the current business model. But a new business model could support freeware.