Bill Gates Patents 'Virtual Entertainment' 141
theodp writes "In the '80s, Bill Gates and his then-girlfriend went on 'Virtual Dates' by viewing the same movie at the same time in different cities and discussing it on their cell phones. On Tuesday, Gates and 15 co-inventors were awarded U.S. Patent No. 8,012,023 for 'Virtual Entertainment', which Microsoft explains: 'The subject innovation provides for systems and methods that supply immersive entertainment, and create a sensation for a user(s) that is similar to having guests (who are in remote locations), to be presented as virtual guests to the user during performance of an event (e.g., a live sporting event, spectator game, television shows, games and the like).' And that silly Audre Lorde said there are no new ideas!"
Virtual Entertainment? (Score:3)
George Lucas has all sorts of prior "art" on that one.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The most (only) entertaining wrestling I have ever seen deserves to be on the sci fi channel.
http://kaiju.com/home.htm
Re:Virtual Entertainment? (Score:4, Funny)
George Lucas
or all of the porn industry...
License to Use soap, milk, and bread - $698.50/mo (Score:4, Insightful)
Virtual Entertainment? - George Lucas has all sorts of prior "art" on that one.
Let's hope he sues. And everyone sues everyone, until everything comes to a standstill, an impossible-resolution scenario. After Intellectual Property World War One, perhaps we'll have some peace treaties. Because as things are going, soon you won't be able to buy soap and bread anymore, you'll have a Subscription to Biological Sterilization and Nutritional Services, with an Agreement and License to Use Proprietary Methods for Human Sterilization and Nutritional Planning Programs. For only $698.50 per month, you can get service contracts, training programs, and... soap, milk, and bread.
The fact that someone might license that stuff... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Great! Then the lawyers will have even more of the money, and more of the influence! Take that, you corporations!
Re: (Score:1)
Bill Gates: "Im gonna patent entertainment!!!"
Steve Ballmer: "I made moar $dollars"
Melinda Gates: "Honey those chldren in africa don't know how to read! "
George Lukas: "These are not the patents you are looking for"
Bill Gates: "Ohh look a butterfly..."
it's lucas damit! c not k (Score:1)
my bad
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
http://secondlife.com/ [secondlife.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Prior art much?
http://secondlife.com/ [secondlife.com]
Calling Second Life 'art' is really pushing it....
Re: (Score:2)
Although... I was referring to the prequels having no real-world entertainment value.
Explain that to my best friend (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Watch it in the basement where you live, by yourself, same as always.
Re:Before the naysayers chime in... (Score:4, Insightful)
Yeah, but this is on the internet which is what makes it novel. Sure, we may have used video conferencing to connect people for business and video lectures at school to have students in multiple locations all share the same class and professor, but that was mostly CCTV. This is the goddamned interner we're talking about. Of course it's a novel, patentable concept.
Besides, if some goofball can patent "dividing the number of golf strokes outside 50 yards by # of greens in regulation" on an 18 hole round to get your "long game" handicap, certainly something like this deserves a patent.
Bill Gates (Score:3)
If you thought Bill G was done, think again!
... In other news... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
You know, that gives me an idea!
I'm going to patent a method of creating patents of ideas either absurdly obvious or already existent. That way all these patents will be, in effect, mine.
The best thing about it? I'll probably get that patent!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There are many people who would be willing to fix it. The problem is that it is in the best interests of the people in a position to fix it not to fix it. And the people with the power to remove those people from office are too busy watching mindless TV shows.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Apple just patented Virtual Entertainment using any rectangular display.
FTFY
Video Conferencing (Score:3)
How is this different from an application of video conferencing?
Re: (Score:3)
It's not. vyew, gotomeeting, or whatever web conferencing software you're familiar with is prior art. Is the USPTO honestly saying that having an avatar in the conference window and it having something to do with an entertainment event makes this novel and some important advancement of the arts?
Bad patent.
Re: (Score:2)
How is this different from an application of video conferencing?
I would say that in the new proposal you can interact with entertaining persons only.
Re: (Score:2)
Just as there were hundreds of patents for "1. Do something that people have done for a long time 2. But On a Computer!" and "1. Do something that people have done for a long time 2. But On the Internet!", this is a patent for "1. Use the videoconferencing tools you normally use for business. 2. But For a Party!"
And yes, it's already been done. I was at a party a couple of years ago where one of the people was attending remotely from the Netherlands by videoconference, and then later, when she was in town
Re: (Score:2)
How is it different from phone sex? Now, that's virtual entertainment!
Not exactly new (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
It sounds like what 4chan /tv/ does every Monday night when there's a new House episode on.
We used to do exactly what has been patented, in Second Life, almost one decade ago. Lets say, 2004-2005ish.
Virtual "fill in the blank" (Score:5, Insightful)
Quick, someone patent Virtual Money so we can virtually pay for our virtual entertainment!
I'm going to patent "Virtual Housing", "Virtual Transportation", and "Virtual Utilities"...
Really... This is just fucking stupid. I'm so done. Please someone just blow up the patent office with a few RPGs, or there's going to be no end to this insanity.
And On the SecondLife grid (Score:2)
you actually can have all of that
Now With Collada Mesh Support!!
the only thing thats a bit iffy is the virtual utilities but you can have scripted objects that have to be "refilled" at intervals so that can be done. And SL has had Media On A Prim for months now
Holy Prior Art BOFHman!!
Re: (Score:2)
I'll patent virtual love, and the billions of left/right-hands of prior art wont stop the patent office from granting me the patent.
Re: (Score:2)
You, sir, have just added a whole new dimension to the expression 'Get a grip on yourself'. Where can I subscribe to your newsletter?
Re: (Score:3)
Please someone just blow up the patent office with a few RPGs, or there's going to be no end to this insanity.
That's so 1990's. These days, you patent a Document Reviewing Process, sue them, and get an injunction.
blow up the patent office with a few RPGs (Score:2)
Yeah, storm the place with a whole lot of Role Playing Gamers with swords and wearing armor (and a handful of clerics and magic users.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
One can only get a software patent if hardware is involved.
For example: you can't patent using an float calculation, but you can patent float calculation inside a GPU and framebuffer when nobody but you (or your company) has been engaged in researching it. (AMD has been sued for that and lost).
Walking on two legs has been done before by other, so no patent for you. Walking on two legs in a computer program can't be patented either, because there is no hardware involved that you invented or thought up that n
Already been done (Score:2)
Friends (Score:3)
In America, it is not date of submission (Score:2)
However, what amazes me is that with a patent like this, I am waiting for a patent to be approved for breathing.
Re: (Score:2)
However, what amazes me is that with a patent like this, I am waiting for a patent to be approved for breathing.
Don't hold your breath! Sorry.
Come along, Virtual Reality... (Score:2)
"Do NOT turn around until I say so!" the officer barked, and the officer flinched a bit as he thought he saw movement in Virtual Reality's shoulder. The officer's hand flew to the tazzer on his belt, and he glared at Virtual Reality for a long moment.
Then the officer suddenly back peddled quickly and slammed the cell door shut. The electromagnet
Cell phones? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
They existed in the 80s?
The first 1G network was deployed in 1979.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but most of the time you had to pass credit checks to get one.
Not much has changed, in that regard. Also they cost "about" the same, weirdly enough. A couple thousand bucks for about two years of service. Some things never change.
If by "cell phone" you mean more generically any cordless phone where you don't own/maintain the base station, IMTS was pretty popular in the late '60s, if you were wealthy enough.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Improved_Mobile_Telephone_Service [wikipedia.org]
I'm told the original MTS from the '40s is still sorta around, like in the wilderness.
So .... (Score:4, Insightful)
He's got a patent on tele-presence? Web cams? Virtual meeting rooms? Avatars?
I don't get it ... other than the belt, how is this conceptually different from lots of things which have been out there for some time now?
I mean, really, how far back can you go with a movie that has a hologram sitting at the meeting table? Star Wars maybe? Maybe older?
Re: (Score:2)
He's got a patent on tele-presence? Web cams? Virtual meeting rooms? Avatars?
I don't get it ... other than the belt, how is this conceptually different from lots of things which have been out there for some time now?
I mean, really, how far back can you go with a movie that has a hologram sitting at the meeting table? Star Wars maybe? Maybe older?
SF goes way, way back. I'm sure that with a little digging we could find a dozen short stories from the 50s or even the 30s.
I seem to recall that H.G. Wells described people attending plays and concerts remotely in "The Sleeper Awakes" which was originally written in 1899 and then revised in 1910.
Re: (Score:2)
1992: James P. Hogan, Giant's Star [amazon.com]
Re: (Score:2)
"and there are no new ideas"
exactly. but this is about telepresenting the _audience_.
though, that's exactly what's been going on in ug internet radio stations.. that's what keeps the hosts going, that there's feedback - maybe even more and immediate feedback than on traditional radio.
because you know, for the band that is playing in some garage and is streaming their live gig, it won't feel like they're doing that unless there's some feedback.
likewise, if the viewers can't participate in any way - then the
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And that sad part is, he probably really believes he invented it too. Hey Bill, I think phone sex pre-dates your movie night dates and I'll leave it to your imagination which was probably more entertaining.
LoB
My bro and his Web Wife have prior art. (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Couple's who have had to spend lengthy times apart have been figuring out how to share experiences like this for a very long time. I did the same thing in the 80s, talking on the phone (landline for me back in those days) after a movie, or even calling during every commercial break during a TV show (which back in those days were automatically synched up for you).
There were probably people who decided to both go see the same latest Shakespeare p
Similar but unrelated thought. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There is ... at least if your watching as a "Party" using the silly add-ons in the M$ Xbox Live Netflix application. It also lets you do live voice chat in the same interface, though I've yet to use it myself.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Prior art (Score:1)
Or from 1988 [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Horrible article (Score:2)
Since TFA links to the pre-grant publication (with its at-publication-time-not-yet-examined claims) instead of the issued patent, here's the first issued independent claim:
A computer implemented system comprising: at least one processor that executes the following computer executable components stored on at least one computer readable medium:
a virtual reality generation component that emulates real-life activities of a guest that is remotely viewing a spectator event that takes place outside of a virtual environment into corresponding virtual activities of a virtual guest representation in the virtual environment; and
a presentation component that presents the virtual activities of the virtual guest representation to a user that is attending the spectator event as an in-person spectator, the presentation system to facilitate an interaction of the user with the virtual guest representation provided in the virtual environment as the guest is remotely viewing the spectator event.
Re: (Score:2)
I think that "horrible article" could be applied by default to "Hey, did you hear they're applying on patent for [trivial thing]?" articles. I'm no fan of the actual patent system, and it's clearly broken, but the version of the patent system presented on Slashdot is fictional.
Re: (Score:2)
t the version of the patent system presented on Slashdot is fictional.
It goes with our fictional news, fictional politics and fictional economy.
Re: (Score:2)
it's just doing a *golfclap* over the internet.
nothing more, nothing less. you can use 100 words to say the same thing, but that's it.
Serious question (Score:1)
Bonus question: If it took 3 years to grant a patent from 2008, and more and more things are being patented as the years go by, how long will it take to grant a patent filed in 2011? Six years?
Re: (Score:2)
Do you now have to pay a nice fee to Bill Gates and his friends?
Yes.
That seems a little unfair to me.
Welcome to intellectual property law and the lawyers that exploit it.
Re: (Score:1)
This is about VIRTUAL reality (Score:2)
This is not patentable! Aaraarggh!! (Score:5, Insightful)
Ideas are not patentable! Patents cover IMPLEMENTATIONS!
According the article:
For example, one of the scenarios shown by Microsoft in the patent filing a belt with “electronic and electromagnetic tracking components” for sensing the movements of the user (although the patent doesn’t appear to be limited to that specific approach).
It sounds like they patented some vague idea of how something might be accomplished. That's not what patents are for.
this patent application was actually submitted way back in 2006 and only approved after years of back-and-forth with the patent office
I can see why... since it isn't a patent. Why was it granted at all? So in case I'm just overblowing this, lets look at the patent itself... [uspto.gov]
...Moreover, the presentation system 101 can employ a personal computer, a projection unit, a system including 3D goggles and headphones, or a simulator providing visual, audible, and physical stimulation, and the like, to present activities of the virtual guest to the user....
Aaand how would you do that? Elsewhere in the patent it talks about presenting virtual smells to the user. Right now, there is no technology to do that. This would be like me patenting teleportation by saying there is some sort of matter-to-energy and energy-to-matter device at either end, with some form of communication in the middle. That's the *idea* of teleportation, not a patentable implementation of it.
Almost every paragraph in the patent says something like this:
What has been described above includes examples of aspects of the claimed subject matter. It is, of course, not possible to describe every conceivable combination of components or methodologies for purposes of describing the claimed subject matter, but one of ordinary skill in the art may recognize that many further combinations and permutations of the disclosed subject matter are possible.
So it keeps admitting that they have no idea how to do this, or what combination of devices might achieve it, but they want to have all of them covered. Ordinarily, a patent author tries and make the patent broad enough to cover similar implementations - so that a trivial change can't be used to avoid paying the royalties. But this is ridiculous.
I think this is perhaps the second most quintissential example of the patent office gone wrong. The best example was when someone patented the tire swing. (Can someone find that? The closest I found was The patent on how to swing [slashdot.org].
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I think this is perhaps the second most quintissential example of the patent office gone wrong. The best example was when someone patented the tire swing
My personal favorite is the patent on the wheel. There is an austalian [ipaustralia.gov.au] one and an american [google.com] one.
Back in 1960... (Score:2)
... my future wife (married in 1976) and I did this. We watched our first opera together -- Don Giovanni on NBC -- she in Wisconsin, I (7 ayears old at the time) in Oklahoma. Of course, it would be a while before we would actually first meet each other. ;~}
MEK
Sounds more like Bill Gates just patented being a (Score:2)
social loser, to me.
Watching a movie on TV while you talk to a girl watching the same movie on TV is the most pathetic date I can imagine. Only Fucking Bill Gates would think of patenting this -- he should patent ordering pizza, sitting around in his underwear, and squeezing pimples while he's at it.
Re: (Score:2)
Watching a movie on TV while you talk to a girl watching the same movie on TV is the most pathetic date I can imagine.
It depends on the girl. The reality is that some of us are living a long way from our loved ones for a few months or years and this kind of thing is the best we can do for now. An idiot would say, "Well your reasons for being apart must be stupid!" but who cares what an idiot says?
Second Life has already been doing this for years (Score:1)
I could see Linden Labs fighting this is they wanted to. regardless of what people think of Second Life they've already done this for several years.
There is so much precendent for this (Score:2)
Seriously... "15 co-inventors"! (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I wish I had been at that meeting. Someone must have been talking about smell-o-vision and thought "hey, let's patent that, and everything else that relates to having a "remote experience".
Then everyone else at the table, who had been talking in on the same conversation that day said "hey, I was part of this invention!"
It sounds dumb, but in two years when they settle with Cisco for 120 million and license telepresence everyone in the office will sue who even heard about it that fateful day
Prior art: Sleepless in Seattle? (Score:1)
Of course - we're all just responding to the /. synposis, though even that suggests that it is a patent for a particular set of technologies/methodologies for providing the experience and not the experience in general:
Windows Live Messenger, for instance, provides a "Watch this Together" link when you past a video or youtube URL to someone, which provides an API for synchronized viewing of the linked content. Obvious idea, sophisticated and non-trivial behind the scenes implementation.
PS3 home anyone? (Score:1)
Arthur C. Clarke... (Score:2)
in his novel "Against the Fall of Night", talked about this with a whole stadium of spectators. It also was made to seem that each of them thought they were in the best seats in the house and seated next to their friends.
I think this story was published in the 50s.
Fahrenheit 451 (Score:2)
I seem to remember something like this in some Science Fiction book. I do believe it might have been Fahrenheit 451.
Prior art!?
Given the description of the 'invention' (Score:2)
I have plenty of prior art, starting with Camfrog, where I stream it all from art that I'm working on to design of hydro systems, plus occasionally stream a youtube video for discussion or what not.
Been pretty fucking obvious, really. The software to get all of this done has been around for quite some time.
SecondLife has been doing it since 2005 (Score:1)
Microsoft has patented this in 2006 [uspto.gov].
Second Life has been doing this since March 2005 [secondlife.com].
There are also other, less known virtual worlds that have been doing it since prior to 2005.
(I think Active Worlds [activeworlds.com] had this running in the same year or earlier? Needs to be checked.)
I wonder if this patent would hold against this sort of a prior art?
Patents (Score:1)
You patent a specific way of doing something, not the general thing itself. Therefore it's not possible for Microsoft to patent the idea of virtual entertainment because that idea already exists. All Microsoft can do is patent the way THEY would do virtual entertainment and then the patent lawyers and judges decide if patent infringing cases apply to the patent or not.
Riker is screwed (Score:1)
Prior art (Score:2)
Prior art galore from the 1970's (Score:1)
Bill Gates was late to the party. There were plenty of virtual dates in the 1970's between computer geeks.
I call (Score:1)
Virtual entertainment (Score:1)
Anyone who has a television and a phone line will be subject to licensing fees...
I think this qualifies as Prior Art Big Time!
My WWII vet dad and I watched the taking of Baghdad from opposite ends of the country via "virtual entertainment"
Re: (Score:2)
But even IRC has prior art, the "imaginary friends" of millions of children throughout history.
I've read a fair amount of science fiction over the years, and whenever I read about interesting aliens (not just humans with fake ears or brows as in the movies), I've often imagined what it would be like giving them a tour of wherever I was at the time. I'd guess that many sci-fi readers have had fun thinking of the reactions of neighbors to a visiting 8-foot insectoid or 100-kg millipede or cute cat-girl o
Re: (Score:2)
In the 70s, we used to use the CB radio to check in with buds at another drive in theater on how the movie was. The HAM guys probably pre-date that too but with less portability.
LoB