 | | | Metaballs - regarding patent. | Metaballs - regarding patent. 2005-04-15 - By Dan Yargici
Back
Michael Jackson?
Pingo wrote:
> who would wanna wake up in a monkey anyway...
>
> On Apr 15, 2005, at 14:25, Adrian Wyer wrote:
>
>> actually, Kim DOES hold the patent for crossing the road.....
>> i think Ben holds the one for waking up in the monkey
>>
>>
>> this thread is SO discussion list bound
>>
>> adrian wyer
>> head of 3d
>> milltv
>> adrian@(protected)
>> www.the-mill.com
>> t: +44 (0)20 7287 4041
>> f: +44 (0)20 7915 0551
>>
>> -- -- Original Message -- -- From: "John Norman"
>> <john.norman@(protected)>
>> To: <XSI@(protected)>
>> Sent: Friday, April 15, 2005 12:59 PM
>> Subject: RE: Metaballs - regarding patent.
>>
>>
>>>>> Kim Aldis wrote:
>>>>> " It's like holding a patent on crossing the road or waking up in
>>>>> the morning. "
>>>>
>>>
>>> Hey Kim, you made my day!
>>> You put it so well, LOL.
>>>
>>> John Norman
>>>
>>>
>>> -- --Original Message-- --
>>> From: owner-xsi@(protected) [mailto:owner-xsi@(protected)]On Behalf
>>> Of kim aldis
>>> Sent: Friday, April 15, 2005 6:59 PM
>>> To: XSI@(protected)
>>> Subject: RE: Metaballs - regarding patent.
>>>
>>>
>>> Specifically software patents, not patents in general. For a good
>>> example,
>>> remember back to Quantel's famous assertion that they had a patent on
>>> something like 'the writing and reading of values to a framebuffer'.
>>> They
>>> attempted to sue a couple of companies a few years ago, most notably a
>>> Japanese company, as test cases. Their assertions weren't upheld but
>>> because
>>> their patent was found to be invalid, rather than because a court
>>> thought it
>>> was dumb that any one company should hold restrictive rights to such a
>>> fundamental action.
>>> Remember, every action you take on a modern computer requires that
>>> something
>>> is read or written to a framebuffer, even just moving a mouse. It's
>>> like
>>> holding a patent on crossing the road or waking up in the morning.
>>>
>>> If that particular patent had been upheld then one of two things
>>> would have
>>> happened; Quantel would have asked for money in return for a license
>>> or they
>>> would have used it restrictively such that only they could manuacture
>>> anything that used the patented item. The former, you'd be paying
>>> more money
>>> for your computer, the latter, you'd be buying kit only from
>>> Quantel, which
>>> is kind of scary.
>>>
>>> Here's a few views on the subject:-
>>>
>>> http://www.base.com/software-patents/examples.html for some interesting
>>> examples
>>>
>>> http://lpf.ai.mit.edu/Patents/patents.html for a good overview.
>>>
>>>> -- --Original Message-- --
>>>> From: owner-xsi@(protected)
>>>> [mailto:owner-xsi@(protected)] On Behalf Of Alastair Hearsum
>>>> Sent: 15 April 2005 10:12
>>>> To: 'XSI@(protected)'
>>>> Subject: RE: Metaballs - regarding patent.
>>>>
>>>> Sorry if this is a heretical question and if I haven't
>>>> thought about this deeply enough but what is wrong with the
>>>> idea of patents?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Alastair Hearsum
>>>>
>>>> -- --Original Message-- --
>>>> From: Joe Saltzman [mailto:joe@(protected)]
>>>> Sent: 14 April 2005 20:39
>>>> To: XSI mail list
>>>> Subject: Metaballs - regarding patent.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I just did a simple google search.... this is what I came up with.
>>>>
>>>> Seems like GE may hold the patent -- they might have become
>>>> aggressive in its enforcement -- do you want to take a chance
>>>> on an infringement case with GE? Could you afford to fight
>>>> such a case? I don't think most people could do.
>>>>
>>>> Just another reason why software patents are not a good thing IMHO.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> Joe Saltzman
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Subject 5.11: What is the status of the patent on the "marching cubes"
>>>> algorithm?
>>>>
>>>> United States Patent Number: 4,710,876
>>>> Date of Patent: Dec. 1, 1987
>>>> Inventors: Harvey E. Cline, William E. Lorensen
>>>> Assignee: General Electric Company
>>>> Title: "System and Method for the Display of Surface
>>>> Structures Contained Within the Interior Region of a Solid Body"
>>>> Filed: Jun. 5, 1985
>>>>
>>>> United States Patent Number: 4,885,688
>>>> Date of Patent: Dec. 5, 1989
>>>> Inventor: Carl R. Crawford
>>>> Assignee: General Electric Company
>>>> Title: "Minimization of Directed Points Generated in
>>>> Three-Dimensional Dividing Cubes Method"
>>>> Filed: Nov. 25, 1987
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I've heard this before and it seems rather absurd. Metaballs
>>>> were in Soft 3D and Houdini before Rem Inforgaphica patented them.
>>>>
>>>> I have never heard of patents being retroactive.
>>>>
>>>> - -- --Original Message-- --
>>>> From: owner-xsi@(protected) [owner-xsi@(protected)] On
>>>> Behalf Of peterb
>>>> Sent: April 14, 2005 1:16 PM
>>>> To: XSI@(protected)
>>>> Subject: Re: Metaballs....
>>>>
>>>> And it didnt stop any competition for implementing them either...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> - -- -- Original Message -- --
>>>> From: "Andi Farhall" <andi@(protected)>
>>>> To: <XSI@(protected)>
>>>> Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2005 7:04 AM
>>>> Subject: RE: Metaballs....
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> > daft question i know but which algorithm did soft|3d use? There was
>>>> > obviously no patent problem there so how come now.....
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> No virus found in this outgoing message.
>>>> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
>>>> Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.10 - Release Date: 4/14/2005
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo@(protected) with the following
>>>> text in body:
>>>> unsubscribe xsi
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>>> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
>>>> Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.9 - Release Date: 13/04/2005
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> No virus found in this outgoing message.
>>>> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
>>>> Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.11 - Release Date: 14/04/2005
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo@(protected) with the following
>>>> text in body:
>>>> unsubscribe xsi
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> ---
>>> Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo@(protected) with the following text in
>>> body:
>>> unsubscribe xsi
>>> ---
>>> Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo@(protected) with the following text in
>>> body:
>>> unsubscribe xsi
>>
>>
>>
>> ---
>> Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo@(protected) with the following text in
>> body:
>> unsubscribe xsi
>>
>
> ---
> Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo@(protected) with the following text in
> body:
> unsubscribe xsi
>
---
Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo@(protected) with the following text in body:
unsubscribe xsi
|
|
|