Kommentarer for Innovationpartners http://www.innovationpartners.dk A weblog about IP and innovation Mon, 06 Sep 2010 16:50:16 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.5 Kommentar til #Lack of protection the source of German success? af Anders http://www.innovationpartners.dk/?p=715#comment-179 Tue, 31 Aug 2010 06:01:04 +0000 http://www.innovationpartners.dk/?p=715#comment-179 Ars has a good take on it. http://arstechnica.com/telecom/news/2010/08/drool-britannia-did-weak-copyright-laws-help-germany-outpace-the-united-kingdom.ars Ars has a good take on it.

http://arstechnica.com/telecom/news/2010/08/drool-britannia-did-weak-copyright-laws-help-germany-outpace-the-united-kingdom.ars

]]> Kommentar til #IEEE patent scorecard for 2008 is out af Jooh Lee http://www.innovationpartners.dk/?p=517#comment-178 Thu, 19 Aug 2010 01:06:14 +0000 http://www.innovationpartners.dk/?p=517#comment-178 How can we obtain the top 500 Global Scoreboard (2000-2009) including Citation indices (if available)? How can we obtain the top 500 Global Scoreboard (2000-2009) including Citation indices (if available)?

]]> Kommentar til #When is movie plagiarism legal? af walidmh http://www.innovationpartners.dk/?p=587#comment-177 Tue, 29 Jun 2010 21:28:52 +0000 http://www.innovationpartners.dk/?p=587#comment-177 dd dd

]]> Kommentar til #Study on the fair use economy bending the arm of reality af Beyer http://www.innovationpartners.dk/?p=684#comment-176 Thu, 13 May 2010 08:47:18 +0000 http://www.innovationpartners.dk/?p=684#comment-176 Very true. It just show that no matter what side you are on you have to do your homework properly. Very true. It just show that no matter what side you are on you have to do your homework properly.

]]> Kommentar til #Study on the fair use economy bending the arm of reality af Ole Husgaard http://www.innovationpartners.dk/?p=684#comment-175 Wed, 12 May 2010 21:15:21 +0000 http://www.innovationpartners.dk/?p=684#comment-175 You are right. This study is tainted due to bad methodology. This is a (not directly stated) point of the study: It is using the same methods, as the study last year from the Copyright Alliance claiming that the copyright industry generating $1.52 trillion. Bad methods for the same reasons as you state here. http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100427/1646069201.shtml You are right. This study is tainted due to bad methodology.

This is a (not directly stated) point of the study: It is using the same methods, as the study last year from the Copyright Alliance claiming that the copyright industry generating $1.52 trillion. Bad methods for the same reasons as you state here.

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100427/1646069201.shtml

]]> Kommentar til #Very inspirational presentation on game innovation af Anders http://www.innovationpartners.dk/?p=679#comment-174 Wed, 21 Apr 2010 20:45:44 +0000 http://www.innovationpartners.dk/?p=679#comment-174 I don't think you are making any sense. You don’t think a method of playing a game should be patentable. But you want patents for keeping score - which I think is very hard to separate from the actual method of playing the game?? Why do you want further monopolies on mental acts, games etc? Regarding Farmville you mention "strong enough protection". But you don't mention "strong enough" for what? Is farmville not a success - does it need more monopoly to become a success? And does it not seem great to you that potentially better variations of the Farmville concept will appear? I don’t think you are making any sense. You don’t think a method of playing a game should be patentable. But you want patents for keeping score - which I think is very hard to separate from the actual method of playing the game??

Why do you want further monopolies on mental acts, games etc?

Regarding Farmville you mention “strong enough protection”. But you don’t mention “strong enough” for what? Is farmville not a success - does it need more monopoly to become a success? And does it not seem great to you that potentially better variations of the Farmville concept will appear?

]]> Kommentar til #Very inspirational presentation on game innovation af Beyer http://www.innovationpartners.dk/?p=679#comment-173 Thu, 15 Apr 2010 10:48:04 +0000 http://www.innovationpartners.dk/?p=679#comment-173 My point is that if you create a technical invention supporting your game..fx a technology for keeping score - you should be able to apply for a patent - even if your invention is in the "game-area". After the success of Farmvill many copy cats have appeared, although not as successful. It may be that branding power is strong enough protection. new regulation - sui generis rules - is not a soultion. It has been tried and does not work. My point is that if you create a technical invention supporting your game..fx a technology for keeping score - you should be able to apply for a patent - even if your invention is in the “game-area”. After the success of Farmvill many copy cats have appeared, although not as successful. It may be that branding power is strong enough protection.

new regulation - sui generis rules - is not a soultion. It has been tried and does not work.

]]> Kommentar til #Very inspirational presentation on game innovation af Anders http://www.innovationpartners.dk/?p=679#comment-172 Thu, 15 Apr 2010 09:56:38 +0000 http://www.innovationpartners.dk/?p=679#comment-172 Hmm. You don't think a method of playing a game should be patentable. But you still want to give temporary monopoly rights for game dynamics? Do you imagine some kind of new temporary monopoly right? Or are you saying "a method of playing a game" is not the same as "game dynamics"? Hmm. You don’t think a method of playing a game should be patentable. But you still want to give temporary monopoly rights for game dynamics?

Do you imagine some kind of new temporary monopoly right? Or are you saying “a method of playing a game” is not the same as “game dynamics”?

]]> Kommentar til #Very inspirational presentation on game innovation af Beyer http://www.innovationpartners.dk/?p=679#comment-171 Tue, 13 Apr 2010 06:31:30 +0000 http://www.innovationpartners.dk/?p=679#comment-171 A method of playing a game is not patentable in Europe as it is (nor do I think it should be). My point is that when creating new game dynamics it´s not something you do in minutes or hours. As is pointed out in the talk I reference there are serious investments and research involved in creating theese dynamics. And the results are better products and workplaces for a lot of people. Why is that investment less deserving of a monopoly than that of an artist or a construction company? A method of playing a game is not patentable in Europe as it is (nor do I think it should be). My point is that when creating new game dynamics it´s not something you do in minutes or hours. As is pointed out in the talk I reference there are serious investments and research involved in creating theese dynamics. And the results are better products and workplaces for a lot of people. Why is that investment less deserving of a monopoly than that of an artist or a construction company?

]]> Kommentar til #Very inspirational presentation on game innovation af anders http://www.innovationpartners.dk/?p=679#comment-170 Mon, 12 Apr 2010 13:21:35 +0000 http://www.innovationpartners.dk/?p=679#comment-170 Yes it exactly a matter of chosing. As you point out for patents. And since you explicitly mention "game dynamics" I find it hard to imagine anything other than patents being relevant. Game dynamics can't be trademarked nor be copyrighted. And very clearly cant be patented in Europe either. So why is it that you think society finds it an acceptable bargain to subsidize game development with temporary monopolies - beyond what already exists? Yes it exactly a matter of chosing. As you point out for patents. And since you explicitly mention “game dynamics” I find it hard to imagine anything other than patents being relevant. Game dynamics can’t be trademarked nor be copyrighted. And very clearly cant be patented in Europe either.

So why is it that you think society finds it an acceptable bargain to subsidize game development with temporary monopolies - beyond what already exists?

]]>