Worlds.com v. NCsoft Update

Earlier today we reported that Worlds.com had filed a complaint against NCsoft for infringing on its patent for enabling users to interact in virtual spaces. When the company  announced previously that they had selected intellectual property law firm Lerner David Littenberg Krumholz & Mentlik LLP, to represent Worlds.com's interests, they explained that they would soon begin contacting representatives throughout the industry. '

When asked if this was just the beginning, LDLKM's Stephen F. Roth, who is serving as lead attorney, demurred: "I wouldn't call it 'starting with NCsoft,'" he said. "It is a very robust patent."

Indeed, others in the industry appear to be concerned. While Roth confirmed that no other complaints had been filed or companies contacted, some observers are taking proactive steps.

"It's likely that other companies will be receiving contacts. A number of people have inquired about it, whether or not they've been contacted," explained James Gatto, IP Section Leader, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP. "It's helpful to know ahead of time when there are patents like this. If there's a change you can make to your system to avoid infringing, many times it's better to make the change. If you've been using the system for several years and then change it, there are potentially still several years of past damages."

If the case proceeds to litigation, it may be one to watch. Patent cases will generally involve each side arguing the interpretations or validity of the claims involved. If they're upheld or rejected, the interpretation could affect future cases.

Roth said that the Worlds.com had no particular reason for filing its first claim against NCsoft as opposed to other companies. He merely noted that they had investigated many technologies and games and that NCsoft's, like Lineage or City of Heroes, were covered by the patent.

He added that Worlds.com is looking for a swift resolution, and Texas, where NCsoft has offices and the complaint was filed, has a sophisticated patent court.

Gatto pointed out that Texas may offer other advantages for Worlds.com.

"Being a foreign defendant in Texas is not a pleasant thing," he said of NCsoft, which is primarily a Korean company. "The juries are, many would say, biased towards American plaintiffs and have a propensity to offer high damages. Some defendants might view them as an unfriendly jury and it might make the defendant more likely to settle."

Many observers have speculated that since Worlds.com's patent was only granted in 2007 and filed in 2000, there may be too many examples of prior art, including NCsoft's own games, for the patent to stand. Roth explained that the patent itself is actually continued on  from a much earlier filing date, November 13, 1995, putting it ahead of NCsoft's founding in 1997.

It's not clear what will follow--NCsoft likely won't be served until the new year and then will have 20 days to respond--but Gatto observed that this is likely only the first of many claims. While General Patent Corporation, which represents Worlds.com, Chairman and CEO Alexander Poltorak previously speculated that everyone from World of Warcraft to Second Life could be in violation, Roth declined to lay out future defendants. 

"I'm not at liberty to disclose what other companies I believe come within the scope of the claims," he explained. "I think it is a very broad and robust claim, managing both bandwidth and the display and interaction of avatars in virtual worlds and massively multiplayer games."

While Roth said that NCsoft had not been contacted previously for licensing opportunities, he added that Worlds was open to hearing from them.

NCsoft, whose Austin office is currently closed for the holidays, has not responded to repeated requests for comment.

Comments

[JC John SESE Cuneta]

Hmm... it is getting more and more interesting. I can't wait for Worlds.com to file against Blizzard Entertainment or their parent company "Activision Blizzard", file against EA (for Ultima Online :p ), EVE, Second Life, etc.

How about Korean and Chinese made Virtual Worlds? I wonder...

[Pac]

They won't. This will get dismissed under prior art. The patent doesn't define any specifics, even under MMO standards. It doesn't define any client/server details or any centralized server at all for that matter, thus even old games like Doom fall under this umbrella. If you played a game via dialup 9600 baud modem with an old friend back in 1994 when Doom came out, you are in violation of this patent. Ron Paul!

[Jak]

They just want to get free massive exposure because these companies have taken all the limelight of the virtual worlds market.

[Anth]

The concept of all their enablement technologies for MMOs aren't specific at all so they do cover precedents, which, IMO, should've been taken into consideration in the evaluation of the patent application.

It's a US patent, so I guess it only covers those games or wares that were created and/or operates in the US. I wonder how things will look when they run into Blizzard.

[Orpheus]

this is uttermost ridiculous. The complaint is so vague and general that every game with an online modus is in danger. I should go to America and file a patent on a concept of breathing oxygen and then file complaints against all people doing the same.

worlds.com makes inferiour games and is just a sad, jealous bunch of losers.

[Ben]

It will get dismissed as there were many other online games using this concept long before they even filed or even existed. If it was my court I would flip the bill and make them pay for wasting tax dollars. Like many cases in the states the whole court system there is a circus.

[Sue Baskerville]

I guess they aren't ever going to produce the updated version of Worlds they've been promising on their web site for so long.

[RuleBook-Lawyer]

I think Worlds is having financial difficulties (like who isn't?). They had over a year since the patent was official, and now they do this, during a recession.

Let's check some things here...
Ah yes, their stocks are down at 0.20 and they want a swift decision from the court. I remember a similar situation with SCO going against IBM. If it turns out to be the same, everytime the stocks need to be jump started, Worlds will file a lawsuit against someone else.

I suspect NCSoft won't be by itself on this one. Other companies are likely to form an alliance against Worlds. And to think this will be swift... maybe in Texas, but not when this case goes to federal appeal process.

[Sean]

If you want prior art, look at Kesmai's online WWII air-combat simulations on the GEnie online service -- Air Warrior, SVGA Air Warrior, Air Warrior for Windows, Air Warrior II, and Air Warrior III. The first version was released for the Mac, Atari ST, and Amiga in 1986 and when I started playing SVGA Air Warrior in 1990, it had a 24-plane view limit -- the server and client would only pass data on 24 of the closest planes for your client to render, and you could literally be shot down by planes that the server and client kept invisible to you (not deliberately -- because this was over dialup lines, the juggling of what planes you could and couldn't see didn't always keep up with their maneuvering in the air around you).

Rendering limits have been in place for all of the online WWII air-combat sims I have known -- besides the versions of AW listed above, there has been Confirmed Kill, Warbirds, and Aces High, all of which were designed with view limits to control the rendering load on the client.

[Arc]

Looks like Worlds.com would be knee deep in you-know-what after MMO fans around the globe are done with them. Just trying to sue Blizzard might spell arson around Worlds.com's offices. I dare not imagine what would become of them.

In any case, analytically speaking, reports such as these are bad for international investments. If American companies keep on suing International companies, international investors would dare not go near the United States. I mean, c'mon people, wasn't Nintendo sued last time? Now NCsoft? Really, a bill needs to be passed against stupid patent cases such as these.

[Arnt]

To the Worlds.com owners, employees and everyone buying services from them: Stop beeing stupid. As Sean says: Companies will stop releasing software in the US. The asian and european market is larger in total, so do software companies really need the US market? Don't think so...

[John]

Heh, I developed MMO games confirmed kill and Warbirds using their claimed method before worlds was even around, before ultima online etc..

If they first filed in Dec 1995, we were already online and had paying customers by that time using those methods.

Kesmai's air warrior was doing it in the 1980's. EA owns that IP now.

I now develop WWII online.

If they come after us I'll definitely be showing prior art from as far back as the 1980's for them.

[Charis P]

World.com is a patent troll. I hope that the rest of the industry buries them in amicus briefs and that NCSoft counterclaims and World.com goes out of business as a result, a fate richly deserved by all patent trolls.

[Justin Bailey]

This is why we (the consumers) can't have nice things. If worlds.com was more than a fleck of dirt on the ass of a camel wandering in the most remote regions of the Sahara, I would actually give two shits about this claim. Unfortunately due to economic hardship and the former I can only afford a half-shit and a hearty "fuck you" to the patent trolls.

[Ramenth]

Fail patent is fail. This sort of thing had already fallen in the public domain thanks to MUD's from the 80's.

Should never have been granted.

[Michael]

GG Worlds. Wait until Blizzard steps in to help NCSoft....You are screwed.

[Lindsay K]

That a patent like this can be granted in 2007 is a sign of how drastically broken the US patent system is.

Even if you buy Worlds' argument that their patent application originally dates from 1995, it's public knowledge that the first MMORPG was Neverwinter Nights, which was invented in 1989 and went live in 1991, pre-dating the very inception of Worlds.com Inc. by 4 years. Furthermore, the 1985 multi-user chat space Habitat is widely known and lauded as the first software to allow virtual representations of people to interact on the internet. This concept was elaborated on by Neal Stephenson in his 1992 book Snow Crash, which actually describes the content of Worlds.com's patent in a great deal more detail than the patent itself.

Also, in a deliciously ironic twist, Worlds.com's patent application refers to the representations of people in virtual space as "avatars," which would not be possible but for the work of the Habitat programmers who had coined the term a decade previously.

[Rob H]

I hadnt even heard of Worlds.com before this. No publicity like bad publicity eh?
All they have succeeded in doing is showing the world what a bunch of moneygrabbing...people, they are.
I really do hope they try this with the bigger companies like EA or Blizzard, they will stand no chance

[Onef]

please, paladin of justice, start a legal action to entire world!
start a legal action to all 3d virtual worlds (chat)comunity, start a legal action to all the publisher an developer of all the virtual world MMORPG, start a legal actions against everyone!
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
and one question... worlds.com? who the hell are you? never heard before, never played with your productions, never visited you website before...
publicity (ref to "rob H" post)?
I don't think so, is something ridiculous is not publicity...
speaking honestly, world.com have the patent from 2000 and only in 2009 (ps happy new year to all :D ) they comes out and say "oh, sir, we got a patent on avatars and virtual words, I'll start a legal action against you..."
please be serious...

best regards

[Andre P.]

It's doubtful that Blizzard will come to NCSoft's rescue on this, since NCSoft's major success is Guild Wars, a project started by ex-Blizzard employees. Indeed, starting with and winning a suit against a "small fry" makes it much easier to win against the big fish.

We as consumers really need to reform the USPTO when it comes to software patents. I mean, the lack of significant 3D hardware was probably the only reason why 3D avatars hadn't been implemented (to the same degree they are nowadays) by 1995, but every other part of Worlds.com patent was already implemented well before that. Patents should be granted on novel ideas beyond the obvious.

For example, the telegraph is a signaling method using a wired transmission mechanism. Extending that transmission to radio waves should not be patentable, or, if wireless transmission is patentable, should apply to all wavelengths such as IR, microwave, X-ray, etc. (in which case, Paul Revere's "one if by land, two if by sea" signal method could be considered prior art for signaling using visible spectra of electromagnetic waves).