Main > Everything Else

Why current age 'video gaming' is a joke

<< < (13/19) > >>

shmokes:

--- Quote from: Vigo on July 16, 2012, 10:42:11 am ---I personally don't see a whole lot of innovation these days. 99.9% of games out there today have nothing unique, so I would say that 99.9% of games made should not be patentable. I guess my point is coming full circle back to the OP's original point then.  :lol

--- End quote ---

This fact is actually central to my reason for wanting to protect code exclusively with patent rather than copyright. If you write some code that is truly innovative, ---smurfing--- patent your creation like every other inventor. But as it stands, even though, as you say, 99.9% of the code out there totally devoid of innovation (and obviously it has no artistic value), every single line of code is automatically subject to 100+ years of protection at the moment of its creation--you don't even have to apply for the protection. Though if someone figures out cold fusion or teleportation or builds a real-life Star Trek replicator, they're going to get only 17 years of protection from the date of application. Or no protection if they fail to make a formal and proper application for protection. It makes no sense. 

Vigo:
I do think that video games have artistic and innovative value, but more along the lines how putting Jack Daniels in Sweet Baby Rays BBQ sauce is a good improvement. It might be clever, but by far not the first time alcohol has been introduced to BBQ.

I completely agree with you on how much of a joke copyright law is. Its not that I think copyright shouldn't exist, it is that it shouldn't exist for the duration or degree that it does. I also think that copyright should in essence diminish with age. So a currently held copyright like Donkey Kong would not even have the same controls on the original game as it has on something newer like that DK game for the Wii. I think a flat out full copyright protection, until it expires is a bad thing. (Expecially when the expiration is 70 years after the creator's death).

shmokes:
And don't get me wrong. Videogames are dripping with artistic value. I'd copyright the ---steaming pile of meadow muffin--- out of videogames. Mario and Bowser and Peach are copyrighted. The dialogue in Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas--copyrighted. It's specifically the code behind the games that should be subject to patent and not copyright.

shmokes:

--- Quote from: Vigo on July 16, 2012, 02:21:09 pm ---Its not that I think copyright shouldn't exist, it is that it shouldn't exist for the duration or degree that it does.

--- End quote ---

There's a running joke in the IP industry that copyright lasts, "For the life of Mickey Mouse plus 70 years." Because copyright protection didn't always last so long. I think it used to be only 50 years of protection. But Disney successfully lobbied for legislation extending the duration of copyright protection at least once, maybe twice, when the copyright protecting Mickey Mouse was getting ready to expire. So shortly before he's set to come into the public domain again we can probably assume that copyright law will be changed again to give life of the author plus 100 years.

Vigo:
Half a novel of debating, and it turns out we agree on this ---steaming pile of meadow muffin---.  :dunno

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version