MMORPG Armageddon?
While catching up on the news this week, I came across an interesting tidbit at Virtual Worlds News: Worlds.com has sued NCSoft, the publisher of such games as City of Heroes, Lineage II, and the ill-fated Tabula Rasa. Worlds.com was one of the early developers of virtual worlds; WebWorld, their earliest, launched in 1994. That’s practically prehistory for the WorldWide Web.
It turns out that, a decade or so ago, Worlds.com filed for two patents. One of them was patent 7,181,690, “System and method for enabling users to interact in a virtual space.” The capsule version: this is a patent on tracking the positions of avatars via a client-server method.
Which, incidentally, closely describes all of the variety of methods used in many modern MMORPGs, including the 900-lb. gorilla, World of Warcraft.
General speculation among the commenters is that NCSoft was chosen as the target because it’s a reasonably successful publisher — so a lawsuit could be profitable — but also a small enough player that it can’t muster the sort of legal representation that, say, Activision/Blizzard might. A win would set precedent, making a later suit against a more powerful publisher more likely to succeed. General feeling also seems to be that Worlds.com is fishing for a settlement.
There also seems to be some question of whether “prior art” — previously-existing MMO-style games — will invalidate the patent. Some point out games ranging from the AOL Neverwinter Nights to Ultima Online as potential prior art. I’m not so sure. The patent is pretty clearly related to three-dimensional representations of virtual spaces, and I think many of the examples cited were two-dimensional games.
It seems a bit strange that a company would wait for almost a decade, while MMOs grew increasingly popular, before seeking to defend a patent. Strikes me as somewhat sketchy, at least. Though my perception might also be colored by the enchanting little fact that Worlds.com filed the suit on Christmas Eve. Not the classiest of moves.
Of course, the legal system has rarely concerned itself with class. If prior art can’t be proved, this case could have far-reaching effects on MMOs. Tracking a player’s position and allowing communication with other players are the two most vital functions of an online game, and a finding in favor of Worlds.com could mean, at least, that publishers would need to pay a royalty — or, alternatively, develop a different sort of architecture for their games. Either of these would add to costs, which could make the difference between survival and shuttering for some of the borderline games out there. What’s already a shaky field for new entries — Tabula Rasa dead after a year, Age of Conan stumbling, Warhammer’s launch weaker than hoped for — could become still shakier. It probably won’t affect World of Warcraft much, or even the second-tier games with solid followings like City of Heroes or Everquest, but it might be very bad for games with a smaller subscriber base. And it might impede the development of others. If I’m reading the patent right, it could even impact online first-person shooters, perhaps even console versions played over a service like XBox Live Arcade. And FPSes are a very popular genre recently.
The wheels of justice turn slowly, but I’ll be watching this one with interest.
Related posts:
- Class Action Filed against Spore DRM
- Cryptic Offering Lifetime Subscription to Champions MMO
- Gencon in Review
- The Humble Indie Bundle
Categories: Computer and Video Games, Industry News | Comments (6)
1 Trackbacks/Pingbacks
- Pingback: MMORPG Armageddon? on Thursday, February 19, 2009


Wow, or WoW! Quite a ballsy move on Worlds.com’s part. I would have to say “Obviousness” might be a case too. There were already 2D MMOs by August of 2000, and one would think that the next evolution would be the move to 3D.
The “Novelty” criterion might be a good defense too, if there were any published material about 3D MMOs.
It might be a smart move on other 3D MMO game companies to contribute resources to NCSoft’s defense. I also think that the patent is too abstract to be enforceable. But I’m no IP lawyer.
Mad Brew´s last blog post: RPP-099: Gamer Elitism
This strikes me as something of a submarine lawsuit, though there’s enough legal weight in favor of the defense to make it almost a non-issue.
The real problem is that this case will be tried in Texas, and Texan judges and juries don’t really take kindly to foreign companies (e.g. NCSoft) on American soil. That’s what I’d be concerned about, not the actual lawsuit itself.
Ben Overmyer´s last blog post: On MUDs and online gaming
True; it seems to me, too, as though they’re hoping the various companies will be willing to pay them to make the specter of a lawsuit go away. And I hadn’t considered the venue; that could make things… interesting.
The patent seems ridiculously broad to me, too, but broadness is the name of the game in patent applications. I’m not sure I should be surprised.
The real problem here is, I suspect, that the patent inspector knew next to nothing about computers or online games, and didn’t research as thoroughly as might be hoped.
Yet another case against the usefulness of patents. They seem more and more harmful, the more I hear about their effects.
Lets hope find their ability to follow up on this can of silliness… limited
http://techliberation.com/2008/10/30/goodbye-to-most-business-method-software-patents/