Re: [Algorithms] alternatives to zfail shadows

[David W. <da...@pl...>]

Oh no... the DX list has turned into Slashdot! :)

By the way, isn't EAX supported just by using DirectSound and such?

-- David


[Jon Watte on 7/30/2004 11:48 AM]

>As far as I understand patent law (which isn't very), each
>independent developer that acquiesces to the patent demand,
>rather than challenge them based on obviousness or prior art,
>actually strengthen the patent holder's claim, because
>"clearly" you'd challenge a patent claim that has good prior
>art or is clearly obvious or equivalent to accepted practice.
>
>So, each developer who accepts the claim and gets a free
>license may bolster Creative's position, until the point
>where they feel they could defend it in court. At that point,
>I wouldn't expect whatever their patent actually covers to be
>free anymore.
>
>I haven't actually read the patent, and I understand that
>some persons believe there is prior art presented, but I'm
>not sure we'll see an actual test of whatever the specific
>claims are for a while yet... Anyone care to be the guinea
>pig? ;-)
>
>Cheers,
>
>			/ h+
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: gda...@li...
>[mailto:gda...@li...]On Behalf Of
>Fredric V. Echols
>Sent: Friday, July 30, 2004 8:26 AM
>To: gda...@li...
>Subject: Re: [Algorithms] alternatives to zfail shadows
>
>
>Here's Creative's reply to the matter:
>
>http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=17525
>
>I don't know about what they'd do in the case of other games, but it sounds
>like if you support EAX you've nearly got a license for the patent already.
>;) Since they didn't demand any royalties or money whatsoever, it's
>certainly not too horrible of them to simply ask that their audio
>technologies be supported... But it remains to be seen how they deal with
>other developers who use this technique.
>
>Obviously, it would be great if this technique wasn't patented at all, or
>not actively enforced. But as it stands, the licensing certainly doesn't
>seem prohibitive.
>
>-Fredric Echols
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Georg Fischer" <gfi...@te...>
>To: <gda...@li...>
>Sent: Friday, July 30, 2004 7:46 AM
>Subject: [Algorithms] alternatives to zfail shadows
>
>
>  
>
>>Due to recent (appauling) events my plans to use zfail stencil shadows
>>have been foiled.
>>I'm wondering if there are any alternatives, that avoid problems like
>>having to keep track
>>of the camera being inside or outside of shadow volumes, which would not
>>be covered by
>>the "zfail patent".
>>
>>This is an extremly frustrating situation, I'm very confused about how
>>much code would need to be changed to be considered a different algorithm,
>>especially since the code in question is pretty much under 10 lines of
>>setting render states. The executable itself doesn't even contain much
>>of the algorithm since much of the math is done on a third party hardware.
>>    
>>
>
>
>
>-------------------------------------------------------
>This SF.Net email is sponsored by OSTG. Have you noticed the changes on
>Linux.com, ITManagersJournal and NewsForge in the past few weeks? Now,
>one more big change to announce. We are now OSTG- Open Source Technology
>Group. Come see the changes on the new OSTG site. www.ostg.com
>_______________________________________________
>GDAlgorithms-list mailing list
>GDA...@li...
>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gdalgorithms-list
>Archives:
>http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_id=6188
>
>
>
>-------------------------------------------------------
>This SF.Net email is sponsored by OSTG. Have you noticed the changes on
>Linux.com, ITManagersJournal and NewsForge in the past few weeks? Now,
>one more big change to announce. We are now OSTG- Open Source Technology
>Group. Come see the changes on the new OSTG site. www.ostg.com
>_______________________________________________
>GDAlgorithms-list mailing list
>GDA...@li...
>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gdalgorithms-list
>Archives:
>http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_id=6188
>  
>