Here is the info on the patent from Words.com’s website.

Worlds has been granted U.S patent 6,219,045 for multi-server technology for 3D applications, which is Worlds’ core technology. The description of the patent is as follows:

“The present invention provides a highly scalable architecture for a three dimensional, multi-user, interactive virtual world system. In a preferred embodiment a plurality of users interact in the three-dimensional, computer-generated graphical space where each user executes a client process to view a virtual world from the perspective of that user. The virtual world shows Avatars representing the other users who are neighbors of the user viewing the virtual world. In order that the view can be updated to reflect the motion of the remote user’s Avatar, motion information is transmitted to a central server process that provides position updates to client processes for neighbors of the user at that client process. The client process also users an environment database to determine which background objects to render as well as to limit the number of displayable Avatars to a maximum number of Avatars displayable by that client.”

As for them using the patented tech, I am not sure how much of a presense Worlds.com really have in the corporate VW niche, but they are certainly a minor player in the MMO/Virtual World scene at least from a consumer’s point of view.

Finally, regarding the patent being badly worded, again I speak only as a consumer, but I hate reading about patents like this which seem designed to do nothing but squash innovation and creativity. A patent, or so it seems to mean, should be specific and focused on whatever elements of your product or idea are truly unique. Patenting broad concepts like this seems somehow wrong. Think of the absurd and suicidal patent suits from SCO over Linux, or the holding company that tried to bring down RIM by claiming patents on any mobile device that recieved emails.

Looking at this patent, it seems like Worlds.com is saying they own a patent over any multi sever, 3D virtual world, which is absurd to me. The Patent Office was wrong to grant it, and a court would be wrong to enforce it.

Doesn’t mean they won’t, but as a consumer and technology fan, this kind of patent grabbing enfuriates me.

Worlds.com, a company that produces stand alone virtual worlds primarily for corporations and celebrities is suing NCsoft, maker of several big-time MMOs such as City of Heroes, City of Villains and Guild Wars for patent infringement, even though those games are now all several years old.

Patents have a specified lifetime. As long as the infringing technology came out after the patent was filed for (and therefore isn’t prior art) and the patent is still in force, why shouldn’t they try to enforce it?

I didn’t see a link to the patent, so I can’t check the date. Do you have a link to it?

Just in that snippet, and being no lawyer, I could think of dozens if not hundreds of companies and games that could be sued over that patent.

There’s also There.com (which several people I used to work with joined). However, does it really matter how many companies are infringing on your patent? Unless they can prove that they invented the concept before Worlds.com, they’re infringing.

[...]they try to use broad and poorly worded patents to fleece companies who are actually doing something with the technology on behalf of those companies who simply know how to game patent law.

Doesn’t that statement contradict the first part of your post that I quoted? You said they were using the technology to create virtual worlds for corporations and celebrities.

While I agree that you shouldn’t be able to patent things that you aren’t using (or, more likely, your patent should be invalidated if you aren’t using it to make something), that doesn’t seem to be the case here.

As for being “broad and poorly worded”, I’m no lawyer, but what is “poorly worded” there? Lawyers generally try to choose each word very carefully (which is why lawyer-ese is so hard to read). Also, as somebody who has gone through the process of getting a software patent, you intentionally try to make your patent as broad as possible to gain as much advantage as possible. That’s part of the game.

Like it or not, patents can be used as swords or shields today. I think some reform needs to be done to avoid patent hoarding by companies that don’t use them for anything more than swords to get licensing fees, but I’m OK with most of the rest of the system.

Personally, I think copyrights are worse with abuse. The copyright holder of “Happy Birthday” apparently still wants royalties, and Disney seems to get copyright extensions every time their copyrights are about to expire….

Steve