Studios Shouldn't Be Allowed To Patent Game Mechanics

Patents only restrict amazing new innovations in gaming from other creative input and suffocate ideas while being an anti-consumer concept.

[phoenixwing]

I agree whole heartedly as a gamer. However as a business ip and ways of doing things have always been in patents and creators of patents should be rewarded. My argument would be to have a set number of years before a patent for game mechanics turns free to all.

[SullysCigar]

That sounds like a fair approach.

This reminds me of Ford. For a long time they owned the patent for heated front screens. This meant I was sat there in my BMW, Mercedes or Porsche, over the years, waiting for the blowers/heaters/aircon to defrost or demist the car before driving everyday. It honestly sucked, knowing that a low-end car would be ready in a fraction of the time and all because of a patent. No amount of money was going to change that.

I felt like Ford should be forced to allow it on safety grounds, even if they were to be paid for it's use. I gave in eventually and bought a Jag and a Rangey because of this, so I guess they got me, the buggers!

Ultimately, if someone invents or perfects something and has the sense to patent it, I guess it makes sense they should be able to profit from it. As you said though, have exclusive rights for a period and then open it up for others and see the benefit via additional revenue rather than sales.

[2moda5gamer]

I guess for all the hard work and creativity they should be able to have dibs for a little while? True it should be shared after time but it takes time to implement things and evolve things anyways.
It's not like the camera from Mario 64 and Locking on targets on OoT were exclusive but before other games took it on board or evolved it, they had it to themselves for some time before it became standard.

[Cueil]

I'm OK with it, but 5 years is all you get. It's stifling innovation