Head Tracking with Cliffs of Dover

[Wolf_Rider]

Originally Posted by sigur_ros

"Did you know the President of United States is alien from outer space? I don't have any evidence but if you would kindly go and get some evidence to prove he isn't alien I will gladly pick holes in it for you..."

the village called, looking for you...

[swiss]

Originally Posted by MadBlaster

then prove how this non-commercial usage of the TrackIR interface is harmful to Naturalpoint?

It replaces their product while using their interface?

But you're right, I should ask in the NP forum.
In case I get useful replies, I'll let you know.

[MadBlaster]

Originally Posted by swiss

It replaces their product while using their interface?

But you're right, I should ask in the NP forum.
In case I get useful replies, I'll let you know.

Ok.

I think potential lost revenue would be very difficult to prove, if not impossible. Especially given that using a webcam is so much cheaper than purchasing TrackIR. For some, the webcam is a sunk cost, so they may only spend $5 or $10 on LEDs or nothing at all if those are a sunk cost too. So you would be arguing to a judge that that same person would have otherwise spent +$150 instead of using something that costs nothing. Then that puts all mouse users on the hook as well. Well, you see, there’s nothing to stand on here.

Another comment on the fourth test. If NP wanted to, they could have chosen not to bundle the TrackIR interface code in games. Simply sell it as separate software package with a market price. When it is bundled, there is no value or the value it indeterminate. How can a judge make a determination on value this way? He can't. Since it is bundled, it is easy to make a case that the value is zero, again, since the game can be played with a mouse.

[sigur_ros]

§ 102 more relevant.

"In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work."

[Wolf_Rider]

Originally Posted by MadBlaster

Ok.

I think potential lost revenue would be very difficult to prove, if not impossible. Especially given that using a webcam is so much cheaper than purchasing TrackIR. For some, the webcam is a sunk cost, so they may only spend $5 or $10 on LEDs or nothing at all if those are a sunk cost too. So you would be arguing to a judge that that same person would have otherwise spent +$150 instead of using something that costs nothing.

you just proved it


*Edit

Originally Posted by sigur_ros

§ 102 more relevant.

"in no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work."

Article 10 paragraph 1 of TRIPs provides that a computer program is a type of work which is eligible for protection under copyright law:

"Computer programs, whether in source or object code, shall be protected as literary works under the Berne Convention (1971)."

[sigur_ros]

...


Yes, computer software protected by copyright law, section 102 of copyright law I repeat here again.

"In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work."

[MadBlaster]

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

you just proved it


*Edit



Article 10 paragraph 1 of TRIPs provides that a computer program is a type of work which is eligible for protection under copyright law:

"Computer programs, whether in source or object code, shall be protected as literary works under the Berne Convention (1971)."

Whatever floats your NWO boat.

[Wolf_Rider]

Originally Posted by sigur_ros

Yes, computer software protected by copyright law, section 102 of copyright law I repeat here again.

"In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work."

Article 10 paragraph 1 of TRIPs provides that a computer program is a type of work which is eligible for protection under copyright law:

"Computer programs, whether in source or object code, shall be protected as literary works under the Berne Convention (1971)."


and

Article 27 paragraph 1 of TRIPs states that:

"(...) patents shall be available for any inventions, whether products or processes, in all fields of technology, provided that they are new, involve an inventive step and are capable of industrial application. (...) patents shall be available and patent rights enjoyable without discrimination as to the place of invention, the field of technology and whether products are imported or locally produced."

[MadBlaster]

Originally Posted by sigur_ros

§ 102 more relevant.

"In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work."

You suggest TrackIR interface code is not an original work, but an outgrowth extension? Maybe this is true since HT technology existed before being used in games by TrakIR. So now we have formulated two possible defenses, all to be nullified by the WTO (lol).

[Wolf_Rider]

who invented headtracking for the PC?