Microsoft and a company called PalTalk Holdings Inc have settled a case regarding Halo and Xbox Live... to the tune of $90 million.
The case did not revolve around technology developed by PalTalk, it regards a company called MPath Interactive, which PalTalk bought for around $20,000. Mpath's technology related to a messaging system used to connect people in a gaming environment.
When the case was initially brought, Microsoft spokes-lawyer David Pritkin commented,"Microsoft said it did review the inventions and chose a different path in developing its games. The technology is for an older dial-up method of communicating between computers and 'the patents don't cover the way the Halo games work."
This is slightly at odds with PalTalk's spokes-lawyer, Max Tribble, who said, "Microsoft had many meetings with MPath regarding their technology, and Microsoft found the technology to be very valuable."
Today, it appears that Pritkin's troubles with Tribble are over as both companies have agreed to settle without messy court proceedings. Microsoft has called the undisclosed settlement, "amicable". Max Tribble said that "PalTalk is quite pleased with the outcome". We guess it was worth more than $20,000 then.
The case did not revolve around technology developed by PalTalk, it regards a company called MPath Interactive, which PalTalk bought for around $20,000. Mpath's technology related to a messaging system used to connect people in a gaming environment.
When the case was initially brought, Microsoft spokes-lawyer David Pritkin commented,"Microsoft said it did review the inventions and chose a different path in developing its games. The technology is for an older dial-up method of communicating between computers and 'the patents don't cover the way the Halo games work."
This is slightly at odds with PalTalk's spokes-lawyer, Max Tribble, who said, "Microsoft had many meetings with MPath regarding their technology, and Microsoft found the technology to be very valuable."
Today, it appears that Pritkin's troubles with Tribble are over as both companies have agreed to settle without messy court proceedings. Microsoft has called the undisclosed settlement, "amicable". Max Tribble said that "PalTalk is quite pleased with the outcome". We guess it was worth more than $20,000 then.
Games:
Halo: Combat Evolved
Read More Like This
Comments
DrkStr 16 Mar 2009 13:17
1/4
troubles with Tribble
LOL!
Way 17 Mar 2009 15:23
2/4
Insane, not worth 9 million in my opinion, courts have to wake up so that out of court settlements like this would be laughed out of negotiation.
In general, if somebody has a patent on a minute part of a program, they should not be entitled to large parts of the profit, but an equivalently small part out of a 10% pool with damages from another 10% of the net profit. At the moment I believe the law still gives potentially virtually uncapped damages that are out of proportion with what is done, IMMORALLY. This only really suites companies with deep pockets to protect or enforce, and represents a constriction of trade and of the innovation that leads to more trade (and monopoly). It is not worth developing on the small end because these factors come out and slap, crash, crack and suck you dry (think horror movie instead of porno Dr Dee) that things so insignificant or common/prior technology that should never had been granted a patent, that is vastly expensive and time consuming to have the patent overturned, are granted patents IMMORALLY and illegally (we are talking generally here, not about the patent in question, that might be valid for all we know) with no criminal repercussions benefiting the well heal in lawsuits, and disadvantaging the small unprepared and poor. Whereas, in contrast, with the automatic 10% pool the company can still continue to trade while it is decided how the 10% is divided among patent holders, with the added incentive of the other automatic 10% being used for damages if they delay the process. This is a long term scheme I have been thinking about for many years (with a lot fo extra bits to it).
In general, if somebody has a patent on a minute part of a program, they should not be entitled to large parts of the profit, but an equivalently small part out of a 10% pool with damages from another 10% of the net profit. At the moment I believe the law still gives potentially virtually uncapped damages that are out of proportion with what is done, IMMORALLY. This only really suites companies with deep pockets to protect or enforce, and represents a constriction of trade and of the innovation that leads to more trade (and monopoly). It is not worth developing on the small end because these factors come out and slap, crash, crack and suck you dry (think horror movie instead of porno Dr Dee) that things so insignificant or common/prior technology that should never had been granted a patent, that is vastly expensive and time consuming to have the patent overturned, are granted patents IMMORALLY and illegally (we are talking generally here, not about the patent in question, that might be valid for all we know) with no criminal repercussions benefiting the well heal in lawsuits, and disadvantaging the small unprepared and poor. Whereas, in contrast, with the automatic 10% pool the company can still continue to trade while it is decided how the 10% is divided among patent holders, with the added incentive of the other automatic 10% being used for damages if they delay the process. This is a long term scheme I have been thinking about for many years (with a lot fo extra bits to it).
more comments below our sponsor's message
PreciousRoi 18 Mar 2009 04:39
3/4
OK, unless the actual amount of the "undisclosed" settlement is $90 million, this is a piece of lousy writing and irresponsible editing...and the highly questionable statement isn't even the headline or sub-head.
max Tribble 11 Jun 2009 06:40
4/4
that is my dad