Digital patents should not exist. Period.
Comment on Palworld confirms ‘disappointing’ game changes forced by Pokémon lawsuit
jsomae@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
Patents should last 10 years instead of 20, and digital patents even less.
BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
jsomae@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
For trivial software features like these, definitely not. I think patents start to make sense in the area of really advanced algorithms, like SAT solvers, ML, and so on. So conditional on patents in general making sense, those kinds of patents seem legit to me.
gradual@lemmings.world 3 weeks ago
Copyright and patent laws should go away entirely.
Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
I can see why parents are so long when you need to build like a billion dollar factory to make a product and mass produce it.
Digital concepts don’t take that much investment and once you have it you don’t need to invest in making more, it’s just there.
So yes, digital patents should be a fraction of the time that physical patents should be. Like 2 years instead of 20.
I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
2 years seems like a nightmare for indie developers. Do you want a bunch of AI Chinese cash grabs pushing things out like Hollow Knight 2: Microtransaction Edition or Stardew Valley Romance Sims? Because without IP protection, indie developers will get creamed.
aesthelete@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I don’t remember all of the differences, but I think you’re conflating copyright, patent, and trademark here. Software patents should almost be not a thing, but copyright and trademark should still exist.
Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
Copyright if elements of the game such as 3D models, images and code have been copied.
Trademark if the name of the game is used (i.e. “Stardew Valley Romance Sims”).
Patents for game mechanics.
As a side note, personally I think that game mechanics shouldn’t be at all patentable
jsomae@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
I don’t believe those indie developers have any patents.