By Roch Ripley on February 6, 2013
A few thoughts on today’s class.
1. All our discussions on EULAs reminded me of this story I had read some time ago, and was able to miraculously find without much difficulty using Google: http://www.cypherpunks.ca/dell.html
2. It also reminded me of this: http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-20002689-71.html
3. When I draft a contract, my primary goal is to clearly state the rights and obligations of the parties so that they can refer to the agreement when necessary to figure out what they have to do and what they’re supposed to get so the parties can avoid litigation. Basically, the contract is there to eliminate (ideally) uncertainty. Aside from issues re: enforceability, I don’t think it matters whether the contract requires a conventional signature or is a click/shrink/browse wrap agreement.
4. If there is a good or service for which you are supposed to sign a EULA before using, then I think in most cases a perfectly viable option is not to use that good or service. I do not have a right to become a Night Elf Mohawk on my own terms.
EDIT: 9:30pm, 6 February 2013
5. I completely agree that innovation is done standing on the shoulders of giants, but also think that incremental improvements can be valuable and worthy of protection. To elaborate on the example we discussed in class today, here are Maxwell’s Equations: http://www.antenna-theory.com/definitions/maxwellseq.jpg
and here is a very simple radio: http://www.sentex.ca/~mec1995/circ/whisker1.html
You start with the equations, which in and of themselves are in the public domain, and through a series of incremental improvements over the years arrive at a practical invention that bears little resemblance to what you started with.
EDIT: 9:46pm, 6 February 2013
5.1 Even better, here is one of Marconi’s very early patents: http://www.google.com/patents?id=7lRCAAAAEBAJ&zoom=4&pg=PA1#v=onepage&q&f=false
Read More | 2 Comments
By patrick4 on February 4, 2013
Our guest speaker this week will be Howard Donaldson, the president of DigiBC. DigiBC’s mission is to promote, support and accelerate the growth, sustainability and competitiveness of BC’s digital media and wireless industry. Prior to joining DigiBC, Howard held senior management positions with Disney Interactive Studios and Electronic Arts Canada.
Howard’s discussion will focus on the business of videogames including the growth of mobile and online gaming, the relative profitability of games produced on different platforms and how taxes influence where games are developed.
-Andrew and Patrick
Read More | No Comments
By Jon Festinger on February 4, 2013
I just tweeted this with the #ubcvgl tag but thought it worthwhile enough that I would post about it as well.
The Globe and Mail has an article discussing how well Swedish tech start-ups (including specifically those related to gaming) are doing: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/international-business/european-business/swedish-tech-start-ups-outdoing-european-rivals/article8183599/.
The article discusses various reasons why the Swedes may be doing so well: a highly connected society, a strong heritage in design and engineering, and even long and dark winters that may boost productivity ( I don’t think Vancouver’s dark and wet winters do anything good for my productivity, but I digress). Intellectual property is not mentioned one way or the other.
Read More | 1 Comment
By Jon Festinger on February 4, 2013
Check out Craftyy, a game engine that allows you to create new games based on other peoples games. Thoughts on tools like these?
http://www.craftyy.com/
jon
Read More | 1 Comment
By Jon Festinger on February 3, 2013
Live Webcast: Social Media and Behavioral Economics Conference:
http://www.law.harvard.edu/news/2013/02/social-media-and-behavioral-economics-conference.html
And lucky you, it ends before class Wednesday if you are in the mood to get up at 6 AM.
jon
Read More | No Comments
By Jon Festinger on February 3, 2013
Disturbing and fascinating. Anyone care to apply the “Double Standards Test” to this?
“Shooters: How Video Games Fund Arms Manufacturers”: Simon Parkin Thursday, 31 January 2013
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-02-01-shooters-how-video-games-fund-arms-manufacturers
jon
Read More | No Comments
By Jon Festinger on January 31, 2013
Hot on the heals of yesterdays discussions (both Jas & I) regarding contractual prohibitions on the legalities/cases dealing with the re-sale of digital property (as well as Michela’s musings on digital property – scroll down under “What is Your Take”), check this out:
German Consumer Advocacy Group Files Complaint Against Valve for Steam’s Used Games Resale Policy:
http://www.gamepolitics.com/2013/01/31/german-consumer-advocacy-group-files-complaint-against-valve-steams-used-games-resale-pol#.UQtYaaXUQcp
Any thoughts/opinions?
jon
Read More | No Comments
By tylerdennis on January 31, 2013
I don’t see a categorical difference between the interactivity of video games and the interactivity of more traditional mediums like television/radio. On a long continuum of interactivity we could certainly place video games on a side of “direct-highly-interactive” and something like radio on the polar opposite; but we <i>do</i> interact with these apparent one directional outputs. It’s just less direct.
With a video game, we expect to have near complete control (within the confines of the system) where our inputs are immediately correlated to some reaction on the screen. With TV, our interaction is a little less direct. Instead of an immediate reaction to pressing a button, there’s a lag time between, but reaction nonetheless. Those television programs that induce observers to change the channel (or simply turn the TV/radio off) are subsequently pushed off the air. Or, modified in some way to cater to a more appropriate target audience. In other words, if stupid people watch the show, the jokes/dialogue will get more stupid. If a show has an extremely large audience, they often feel the pressure to take on more social/political/topical issues; consider themes of “The Simpsons”, “Family Guy”, “South Park”, in their later seasons compared to the earlier seasons. The size and type of audience has a direct (or more indirect) impact of what the show’s themes will be. And, has anyone ever called into a radio show? Whether you get through or not, you’ve essentially pressed the ‘A’ button. I don’t see why we should discriminate on “interactivity” being instantaneous and predictable vs variable and subtle.
Perhaps somewhere closer to the middle of the continuum would be a DVD menu; or better yet the “spectate” function of many competitive video games. The spectate function within League of Legends or Starcraft 2 give the spectator the ability to see the game played from a different perspective, and to modify the perspective in real time. The spectator may not impact the result of a match, but their unique exercise of skill and judgment in deciding what is important to consider (graphs of army strength, economic factors, which character to follow and when etc..) if expressed (recorded…?) would certainly be the subject of intellectual property. There are professional spectators, well paid for their expertise in this role!
Read More | 1 Comment