Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:
Fort Collins, CO 03/24

Regularly scheduled events

ZeniMax Wins $500M in Oculus Lawsuit

ZeniMax has won a $500 million judgment in its lawsuit versus Oculus, though the jury did not find they had misappropriated trade secrets, reports Polygon. The half-billion dollars is for failing to abide by an NDA, copyright infringement, and false designation. $300M of that will come from Oculus, $150M from CEO Brendan Iribe, and $50M from company founder Palmer Luckey. Polygon says Oculus says they will appeal, but are looking forward to putting the case behind them, expressing their commitment to the long term success of virtual reality, the technology at the heart of the lawsuit. On the other side of the decision, ZeniMax says it may seek court order to halt sale of current Oculus Rift headsets.

View
40 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >

40. Re: On Sale Feb 3, 2017, 02:21 Sepharo
 
You said they were babbling but it was pretty clear and said "at all" but now you're equivocating.

I agree with the rest except maybe 6...
It's a display technology. You don't ask a flat panel maker to specify their end user.
 
Avatar 17249
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
39. Re: On Sale Feb 3, 2017, 01:53 Kxmode
 
Sepharo wrote on Feb 2, 2017, 22:49:
You're talking about the current state of VR.
The phrase "commitment to the long term success" is future looking.
They're committed to making it successful by improving/fixing the things you listed.

Absolutely, and I hope they achieve that. However, I had a purpose in mind by specifically quoting those six words ("long term success of virtual reality"). In other words, without addressing some or all of the things I list there will be no future. Let's hope their commitment involves some of the bullet points. I am still of the mindset that a killer app is very much needed. Whatever that happens to be, who knows, but it must happen if they want explosive growth and cultural adoption on the level of an iPhone, CD-ROM, and mouse. Only when VR becomes an appliance will it achieve much.
 
Avatar 18786
 
"It is possible to synthesize excited bromide in an argon matrix. It’s an excimer frozen in its excited state."
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
38. Re: On Sale Feb 2, 2017, 22:49 Sepharo
 
Kxmode wrote on Feb 2, 2017, 00:19:
long terms success of virtual reality

What are they babbling about? There's no long-term success at all.

1. VR hasn't reached broad market penetration.
2. VR is a niche product.
3. No killer app.
4. Expensive entry cost.
5. Unproven technology. Mostly "beta" and "early access."
6. Aimlessness (Is it for gamers? Does it have a medical application? Can teachers use it? etc.)
7. Costly R&D.
8. Horrible ROI.

In the past, I opined that VR needs to produce something within a year that becomes "so necessary or desirable that it proves the core value of some larger technology." If it doesn't happen, VR will fade and die just like any other new tech. There's only so much money Facebook, HTC, and others can dump into VR before it becomes a costly failure. The shareholders are going to demand something soon.

You're talking about the current state of VR.
The phrase "commitment to the long term success" is future looking.
They're committed to making it successful by improving/fixing the things you listed.
 
Avatar 17249
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
37. Re: On Sale Feb 2, 2017, 18:07 Kxmode
 
RedEye9 wrote on Feb 2, 2017, 12:49:
Kxmode wrote on Feb 2, 2017, 00:19:
rant SNIP rant
VR will change the world. If you think it is just "a fad" like 3DTV was, you are incorrect. Applications like crossover AR/VR are just beginning to scratch the surface.
VR gaming kicks ass and is here to stay.

Two points.

1. According to Merriam-Webster, they define fad as "something that is very popular for a short time." Note the definition includes the words "very popular." 3DTV was never a fad because it never became very popular. Examples of legitimate fads include:

> Gangnam Style
> Tickle Me Elmo
> Pokémon Go
> Hula-hoop
> Cabbage Patch Kids
> Pet Rock
> Rubik's Cube
> Hacky sack
> Lava lamps
> Mood rings
> and so forth

Today's VR has not reached very popular status no matter your perspective on it. It is still a niche product for people with the money who can afford the technology and the required computer hardware. VR cannot be classified as a fad. If you disagree, reach out to the Merriam-Webster folks and explain why you believe "very popular" isn't the correct words to use.

2. The lifespan of a fad is driven entirely by interest. There's no rhyme or reason for why something is very popular one month and then forgotten the next. Contrast that with the detailed and specific points I made in my initial comment. They are based on very real analytical breakdowns of why VR will eventually fold if action is not taken.

While I appreciate your points and do hope VR changes the world, I would ask that you try and comprehend my comments before responding. Calling my post nothing more than a "rant about a fad" is disingenuous to my intended meaning.
 
Avatar 18786
 
"It is possible to synthesize excited bromide in an argon matrix. It’s an excimer frozen in its excited state."
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
36. Re: ZeniMax Wins $500M in Oculus Lawsuit Feb 2, 2017, 17:25 Mordecai Walfish
 
Carmack put up a post about the trial on his FB, quoted here:


The Zenimax vs Oculus trial is over. I disagreed with their characterization, misdirection, and selective omissions. I never tried to hide or wipe any evidence, and all of my data is accounted for, contrary to some stories being spread.

Being sued sucks. For the most part, the process went as I expected.

The exception was the plaintiff’s expert that said Oculus’s implementations of the techniques at issue were “non-literally copied” from the source code I wrote while at Id Software.

This is just not true. The authors at Oculus never had access to the Id C++ VR code, only a tiny bit of plaintext shader code from the demo. I was genuinely interested in hearing how the paid expert would spin a web of code DNA between completely unrelated codebases.

Early on in his testimony, I wanted to stand up say “Sir! As a man of (computer) science, I challenge you to defend the efficacy of your methodology with data, including false positive and negative rates.” After he had said he was “Absolutely certain there was non-literal copying” in several cases, I just wanted to shout “You lie!”. By the end, after seven cases of “absolutely certain”, I was wondering if gangsters had kidnapped his grandchildren and were holding them for ransom.

If he had said “this supports a determination of”, or dozens of other possible phrases, then it would have fit in with everything else, but I am offended that a distinguished academic would say that his ad-hoc textual analysis makes him “absolutely certain” of anything. That isn’t the language of scientific inquiry.

The notion of non-literal copying is probably delicious to many lawyers, since a sufficient application of abstraction and filtering can show that just about everything is related. There are certainly some cases where it is true, such as when you translate a book into another language, but copyright explicitly does not apply to concepts or algorithms, so you can’t abstract very far from literal copying before comparing. As with many legal questions, there isn’t a bright clear line where you need to stop.

The analogy that the expert gave to the jury was that if someone wrote a book that was basically Harry Potter with the names changed, it would still be copyright infringement. I agree; that is the literary equivalent of changing the variable names when you copy source code. However, if you abstract Harry Potter up a notch or two, you get Campbell’s Hero’s Journey, which also maps well onto Star Wars and hundreds of other stories. These are not copyright infringement.

There are objective measures of code similarity that can be quoted, like the edit distance between abstract syntax trees, but here the expert hand identified the abstract steps that the code fragments were performing, made slides that nobody in the courtroom could actually read, filled with colored boxes outlining the purportedly analogous code in each case. In some cases, the abstractions he came up with were longer than the actual code they were supposed to be abstracting.

It was ridiculous. Even without being able to read the code on the slides, you could tell the steps varied widely in operation count, were often split up and in different order, and just looked different. The following week, our side’s code expert basically just took the same slides their expert produced (the judge had to order them to be turned over) and blew each of them up across several slides so you could actually read them. I had hoped that would have demolished the credibility of the testimony, but I guess I overestimated the impact.

Notably, I wasn’t allowed to read the full expert report, only listen to him in trial, and even his expert testimony in trial is under seal, rather than in the public record. This is surely intentional -- if the code examples were released publicly, the internet would have viciously mocked the analysis. I still have a level of morbid curiosity about the several hundred-page report.

The expert witness circuit is surely tempting for many academics, since a distinguished expert can get paid $600+ an hour to prepare a weighty report that supports a lawyer’s case. I don’t have any issue with that, but testifying in court as an expert should be as much a part of your permanent public record as the journal papers you publish. In many cases, the consequences are significant. There should be a danger to your reputation if you are imprudent.
 
Avatar 56178
 
Currently playing: Final Fantasy Tactics: War of The Lions (PSP) , River City Ransom Underground (Steam) , GTA:V (PC) , Zeliard (PC-DOS)
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
35. Re: On Sale Feb 2, 2017, 14:36 CJ_Parker
 
Xirgu wrote on Feb 2, 2017, 10:55:
not sure where all this doom and gloom comes from. lots of companies throwing money at vr.. for board room/meeting systems, medical training, engineering has been using VR forever, some companies selling houses have vr tours, etc etc.. all niche areas but lots of them, I even saw a working demo of a system to treat people having anxiety disorders. gaming is slowly picking up too, with consoles having VR..its just new.

This is all very much correct and I do not think that anyone here is saying that VR does not have its uses and purposes outside of gaming but as far as gaming is concerned it's a fad. It's a hype that has already all but died since it is no longer dominating gaming news. It is already on a steep decline towards insignificance.
Suckerjerk never bought OR for VR's gaming capabilities anyway. Suckerjerk gives zero fucks about gaming. He wants to have a foot in the door in case VR takes off in the social media landscape. That is all.

But in gaming it just won't take off. For it to take off you'd have to convince the console peasants that it's fun to strap shit to your head while slouched on the couch for hours. Not gonna happen. A console peasant can barely be bothered to reach for the next beer when they lazily lie down for some CoD in front of their TV. With a VR headset they wouldn't even be able to hit their breathing mouth with the beer bottle. So how the fuck would that ever work? See. You gotta think practical.

People might strap shit to their head in professional capacities because they are used to it or have to do it. VR will certainly find its commercial uses. But as far as gaming is concerned, nope.
They'd have to find a way to make it work with wireless latency-free goggles that are at most as large as regular glasses (look at how many people hate wearing glasses even). Only then might it have a slight chance of carving out more than a niche in gaming...
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
34. Re: On Sale Feb 2, 2017, 12:49 RedEye9
 
Kxmode wrote on Feb 2, 2017, 00:19:
rant SNIP rant
VR will change the world. If you think it is just "a fad" like 3DTV was, you are incorrect. Applications like crossover AR/VR are just beginning to scratch the surface.
VR gaming kicks ass and is here to stay.
 
Avatar 58135
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
33. Re: On Sale Feb 2, 2017, 12:44 HorrorScope
 
eRe4s3r wrote on Feb 2, 2017, 08:10:
What is really needed though is a 2nd gen of VR goggles that somehow offload the majority of computations or at least offer image quality and lenses (where are adaptable bio-lenses????) improvements.

This is what has to happen to get the next tier of consumers into the mix.
 
Avatar 17232
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
32. Re: ZeniMax Wins $500M in Oculus Lawsuit Feb 2, 2017, 12:43 HorrorScope
 
DangerDog wrote on Feb 2, 2017, 03:35:
Task wrote on Feb 1, 2017, 22:56:
Well shit, was hoping to buy an Oculus one of these days, hopefully this doesn't affect them making more. I guess there's always the VIVE.

I bet the VIVE project gets shelved too.

Eventually they'll have the technology to put super high res screens into something as comfortable as a pair of glasses, the bulky things they have now will never be a mainstream success.

But that can all just be Vive 5.0 or something like that or another name, but roots all back to Vive. There was some display tech I was reading on last night where pixel density and latency barriers were shattered, both would be solid benefits to VR. To me though they still need to get that cost down some for not even mainstream success, which I don't care about that.
 
Avatar 17232
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
31. Re: ZeniMax Wins $500M in Oculus Lawsuit Feb 2, 2017, 12:40 HorrorScope
 
Slick wrote on Feb 2, 2017, 00:50:
HorrorScope wrote on Feb 2, 2017, 00:29:
Task wrote on Feb 1, 2017, 22:56:
Well shit, was hoping to buy an Oculus one of these days, hopefully this doesn't affect them making more. I guess there's always the VIVE.

That was one of the things they won, they can still make VR systems to sell.

Too bad, they could have done us all a favour by dreamcasting the rift down the drain. There are other OpenVR solutions, there's not only 2 players in the market, so it still wouldn't be a monopoly, but the Vive is the far superior, elegant solution.

For all the hate that I heap on Valve for their garbage practices with Steam, they do make one hell of a VR system, and they're supporting the ecosystem too. Respect where it's due, Valve hit it out of the park with the Vive. And if them continuing to support their mostly irrelevant SteamOS and Steam Boxes for years and years, at least we can assume that the steam VR team will keep this experiment going for many years to come, even if VR as a whole doesn't take off.

I like the Steam Controller and Link to! Yeah they do us all a solid. PC Gaming has never been in better shape for the consumer.
 
Avatar 17232
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
30. Re: On Sale Feb 2, 2017, 10:55 Xirgu
 
not sure where all this doom and gloom comes from. lots of companies throwing money at vr.. for board room/meeting systems, medical training, engineering has been using VR forever, some companies selling houses have vr tours, etc etc.. all niche areas but lots of them, I even saw a working demo of a system to treat people having anxiety disorders. gaming is slowly picking up too, with consoles having VR..its just new.
It is expensive though so you wont have one in every home for a while, but like tv`s it will get there..just give it a year or 2 to reach large numbers. it wont die out as its not just gaming driving its development.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
29. Re: On Sale Feb 2, 2017, 10:38 CJ_Parker
 
eRe4s3r wrote on Feb 2, 2017, 08:10:
The Internet took well over a decade to gain ground, and nearly 20 years before it gained ANY traction, despite obvious uses...

The Internet has the distinct advantage though that you don't need to strap it to your head while looking like a fucking retard and being blocked from all outside (visual) interaction.
VR will always stay niche as long as it requires unwieldy goggles. It's human nature to not want to wear something unwieldy and ugly on your head.
Case in point: Biking. Look at how many people still ride their bikes without a helmet because they feel it is ugly and constricting even though it MASSIVELY improves safety in an accident scenario where you fall on your head.

Nope. VR ain't goin' nowhere. It will end up being the same fad as 20 years ago when everyone was dreaming about holodecks and shit like that. Like that ever happened...
It will die just like surround gaming or stereoscopic 3D has died (or how it has become a negligible niche, poorly supported by the drivers with no improvements or bug fixes in sight).

VR is dead in the water right now. The hardware was disappointing. The software support even more so. The hype is gone. It's doomed a.k.a fucked.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
28. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Feb 2, 2017, 09:12 Task
 
DangerDog wrote on Feb 2, 2017, 03:35:
Task wrote on Feb 1, 2017, 22:56:
Well shit, was hoping to buy an Oculus one of these days, hopefully this doesn't affect them making more. I guess there's always the VIVE.

I bet the VIVE project gets shelved too.

Eventually they'll have the technology to put super high res screens into something as comfortable as a pair of glasses, the bulky things they have now will never be a mainstream success.

Why? The new VR things are like a replacement or better alternative to Track IR for flight Sims.
 
Avatar 37119
 
Playing: Dragon Quest 1, Bravely Default
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
27. Re: On Sale Feb 2, 2017, 08:10 eRe4s3r
 
Kxmode wrote on Feb 2, 2017, 00:19:
long terms success of virtual reality

What are they babbling about? There's no long-term success at all.

1. VR hasn't reached broad market penetration.
2. VR is a niche product.
3. No killer app.
4. Expensive entry cost.
5. Unproven technology. Mostly "beta" and "early access."
6. Aimlessness (Is it for gamers? Does it have a medical application? Can teachers use it? etc.)
7. Costly R&D.
8. Horrible ROI.

In the past, I opined that VR needs to produce something within a year that becomes "so necessary or desirable that it proves the core value of some larger technology." If it doesn't happen, VR will fade and die just like any other new tech. There's only so much money Facebook, HTC, and others can dump into VR before it becomes a costly failure. The shareholders are going to demand something soon.

The Internet took well over a decade to gain ground, and nearly 20 years before it gained ANY traction, despite obvious uses...

What is really needed though is a 2nd gen of VR goggles that somehow offload the majority of computations or at least offer image quality and lenses (where are adaptable bio-lenses????) improvements.
 
Avatar 54727
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
26. Re: ZeniMax Wins $500M in Oculus Lawsuit Feb 2, 2017, 06:54 VaranDragon
 
So many armchair judges here. OMG John Carmack DELETED SHIT ON HIS COMPUTER. Its the end. He is dead to me. Dead I tell you.


Some of you people are damn pathetic.
 
Avatar 58327
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
25. Re: ZeniMax Wins $500M in Oculus Lawsuit Feb 2, 2017, 05:29 NewMaxx
 
Wait, wait, 500 million? 10% of 4-6 billion as was litigated? Who ever could have predicted that.  
Borecraft Games on YouTube
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
24. Re: ZeniMax Wins $500M in Oculus Lawsuit Feb 2, 2017, 04:58 Rigs
 
DangerDog wrote on Feb 2, 2017, 03:35:
Task wrote on Feb 1, 2017, 22:56:
Well shit, was hoping to buy an Oculus one of these days, hopefully this doesn't affect them making more. I guess there's always the VIVE.

I bet the VIVE project gets shelved too.

Eventually they'll have the technology to put super high res screens into something as comfortable as a pair of glasses, the bulky things they have now will never be a mainstream success.

I dunno about that. Have you seen how many kids sit around their rooms with a PSVR strapped to their head? In the last month alone I've seen tons of pictures and video. It's catching on, slowly. It just needs a killer app. That's just about the only thing missing from VR to go totally legit mainstream. And I'm sure one will come along soon...

=-Rigs-=
 
Avatar 14292
 
'Ah, arrogance and stupidity all in the same package, how efficient of you...I only hope that in your stumbling around, you do not wake the dragon.' They didn't listen, of course. Arrogant men never do.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
23. Re: ZeniMax Wins $500M in Oculus Lawsuit Feb 2, 2017, 04:58 Pr()ZaC
 
DangerDog wrote on Feb 2, 2017, 03:35:
Task wrote on Feb 1, 2017, 22:56:
Well shit, was hoping to buy an Oculus one of these days, hopefully this doesn't affect them making more. I guess there's always the VIVE.

I bet the VIVE project gets shelved too.

Eventually they'll have the technology to put super high res screens into something as comfortable as a pair of glasses, the bulky things they have now will never be a mainstream success.
They need to ditch the wires,too.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
22. Re: ZeniMax Wins $500M in Oculus Lawsuit Feb 2, 2017, 03:35 DangerDog
 
Task wrote on Feb 1, 2017, 22:56:
Well shit, was hoping to buy an Oculus one of these days, hopefully this doesn't affect them making more. I guess there's always the VIVE.

I bet the VIVE project gets shelved too.

Eventually they'll have the technology to put super high res screens into something as comfortable as a pair of glasses, the bulky things they have now will never be a mainstream success.
 
Avatar 6174
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
21. Re: ZeniMax Wins $500M in Oculus Lawsuit Feb 2, 2017, 03:31 Kajetan
 
BIGtrouble77 wrote on Feb 2, 2017, 02:21:
If this was proven to be an accurate depiction of events, ...
But it wasnt proven ...
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
40 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo