Infernal Technology, LLC v. Activision Blizzard Inc.

Case No. 2021-2349

Decided: January 24, 2023

The Federal Circuit issued a decision on January 24, 2023 stating that a collection of Activision Blizzard’s video games did not infringe two patents that dealt with methods of lighting computer graphic scenes in video games. The Federal Circuit’s decision turned on a dispute over claim construction and a question of “antecedent basis,” which is the general principle that language in a patent claim that refers back to an element introduced earlier in the claim should be read as being the same element. This is a common issue in patent cases, and is why patent claims use language like “said item” (though recently “said” has fallen out of fashion, replaced by “the item”).

The case arose when Infernal Technology, LLC (“Infernal,” joined by a second company, Terminal Reality Inc.) sued industry giant Activision Blizzard for allegedly infringing two patents, US Patent No. 6,362,822 (the ’822 patent) and US Patent No. 7,061,488 (the ’488 patent). Both patents dealt with—and were in fact titled—“lighting and shadowing methods and arrangements for use in computer graphics simulations.” Infernal argued that 19 games produced by Activision Blizzard infringed the lighting and shadowing methods described by the ’822 and ’488 patents, including multiple titles in the Call of Duty series, the Destiny series of games, an expansion game to the MMO World of Warcraft, and several games under the Skylanders title.

The central issue of the case was Infernal’s interpretation of a definition of “observer data” in the claims of the ’822 patent (which the Federal Circuit deemed applicable to the ’488 patent as well). Claim 1 of the ’822 patent recited “providing observer data of a simulated multi-dimensional scene,” and later in the claim recited “combining at least a portion of [a] light accumulation buffer with said observer data.” The first issue in a patent infringement case is to figure out what the terms mean. The District Court which first heard Infernal’s case interpreted “observer data” to mean “data representing at least the color of objects in a simulated multi-dimensional scene as viewed from an observer’s perspective,” an interpretation both parties agreed with. Essentially, this definition limited the scope of the technology at issue to the concept of combining two things. First, data representing what a player of a game would see on the screen (the “at least the color of objects in a simulated multi-dimensional scene,”) and second, a process for lightening pixels on a screen using “said observer data” and a “light accumulation buffer.”

The Activision-Blizzard games provided “observer data” that met the District Court’s definition of “providing observer data of a simulated multidimensional scene,” the first mention of “observer data” in the claims. However, the source code controlling the games later combined a narrower set of the observer data with a “light accumulation buffer.” To address this, Infernal argued that the “said observer data” the ’822 patent combines with the light accumulation buffer could be a narrower set of the observer data. In essence, Infernal argued that the “said observer data” mentioned in claim 1 did not need to refer to the exact same set of “observer data” mentioned earlier in the claim.

For example, argued Infernal, the first mention of observer data (“providing observer data”) might refer to multiple different types of data relating to what the player might see on the screen, such as albedo (color data), normal vector, position, depth, and other data. But, argued Infernal, the observer data combined with the light accumulation buffer (“said observer data) might be a narrower subset of observer data. For example, this second reference to observer data might refer only to the albedo/color of objects displayed on a screen. If the “said observer data” could refer to a narrower subset of the earlier-mentioned observer data, then Activision-Blizzard’s games would infringe Infernal’s patents.

Unfortunately for Infernal, the District Court held—and the Federal Circuit agreed—that because the claim used the phrase “said observer data” in the later mention to observer data, the claim must be referring to the same observer data in the earlier-mentioned “providing observer data” step. This is the concept of “antecedent basis” mentioned above, which basically means that where a term in a claim refers to an earlier use of the term, both instances must have the same meaning. Additionally, because the ’822 patent’s claims also refer to “a portion of the observer data,” the Federal Circuit agreed with the District Court’s construction that the “said observer data” must refer to the entire set of “observer data” initially provided. As a result, because the accused Activision games combined a narrower set of observer data with the light accumulation buffer than the set of observer data that was initially “provided,” Infernal failed to show the Accused Games infringed the claims of the ’822 and ’488 patents. The Federal Circuit affirmed a motion for summary judgment on behalf of Activision Blizzard, granting them victory in the case.

This case serves as a reminder that, as always, the claim is the most important part of the patent and claim language is going to be read for what it says.  Careful claim drafting is important when preparing and prosecuting a patent.  But also important is considering potential future infringers and how to claim the invention in a manner that avoids creating opportunities for design arounds.

Check back here for future posts about game related lawsuits and patents!

Thanks to John Peloquin for preparing this case summary.

U.S. Patent No. 10,363,481: System for multi-user communications using discrete video game platforms

Issued July 30, 2019, to Nintendo Co. Ltd
Filed June 30, 2016 (claiming priority to August 21, 2001)

Overview:

U.S. Patent No. 10,363,481 (the ‘481 patent) relates to player characters having and visiting unique player environments through coupling hardware, allowing nonplayer characters (“NPCs”) to move in and out of the environments and some NPCs to become accessible. The ‘481 patent details a game-playing system with several game-playing devices, each device having instructions for establishing and running a unique gaming environment, including resident characters, determined (at least in part) by random data. Game data is stored on a physically moveable handheld object (a “memory card”), coupleable to individual game-playing devices.

When a first game-playing device is executing the game software, it is configured to present a first gaming environment. When executing the game, the first game-playing device reads character-related data from at least one memory card to activate an avatar in the first gaming environment, usable in the environment, on the condition it is coupled to at least one memory card.

The game-playing device modifies the character data, consistent with player interactions with the software, and writes the modified data onto at least one memory card. The avatar is made unavailable in the first gaming environment in response to a decoupling of at least one memory card from the device, but can become available upon recoupling. The game playing device still allows interaction with the first gaming environment despite a memory card being no longer coupled.



A second game-playing device executing the game software presents a second gaming environment, different from the first. In response to at least one memory card being coupled to the second game-playing device after the modified character-related data has been written on said memory card, the game-playing device reads the modified data to activate the avatar in the second gaming environment, now with modified attributes. The modified character-related data is further modified consistent with the player’s interactions with the software.



Successive coupling involving at least one memory card enables another character, different from the avatar, to be available in the gaming environments of the coupled-to game-playing devices without player knowledge of at least the initial transfer.



The ‘481 patent relates to Animal Crossing for the GameCube, specifically visiting other players’ towns and the moving in and out of characters.



The ‘481 patent also includes the Gyroid/Haniwa face Easter egg, which is a replacement face for an avatar if it is loaded while “out of town” or the character-associated memory card is not plugged in.



Nowadays, when one wants to visit their friend’s Animal Crossing village (or island as in Animal Crossing: New Horizons), they simply need to connect to the internet and enter a friend code (or a Dodo code) to make a quick trip. The GameCube version, on the other hand, had two memory card slots which could be used for village visiting. To visit a friend’s village, you would simply plug the memory card associated with their village into memory card slot B, load into your village as normal (with the normal memory card associated with your village in slot A), and hop on the train in your village to check out their town. If the friend would try to load into their village, on their GameCube without the memory card, their character would load with the dreaded Gyroid face.

Every time players would visit each other’s worlds, villagers would move from one village to the other. This was really upsetting to some young players, so subsequent versions have grown less and less harsh about villagers moving. It is also possible that the enabling of characters not previously available in the ‘481 patent relates to Blanca, who appears only on the train in between villages, as well as new villagers or existing villagers from a friend’s village moving in.

With Nintendo discontinuing Wi-Fi service for the Nintendo DS and Wii, Animal Crossing: Wild World and Animal Crossing: City Folk, no longer have multiplayer, making the GameCube Animal Crossing one of the only older installments in the series still offering the ability to visit friends’ worlds. This method of game sharing has made it one of the most long-lasting!

 

Abstract:

A multi-user video game with communications capabilities allows players to communicate with one another via simulated mail, leaflets and conversations. Different installations of the game on different discrete video game playing platforms may be unique or different depending upon random or other data available at the platform. For example, different installations may have different subsets of characters, different landscapes, or the like. Player characters from one virtual environment or village may visit another virtual environment or village and return home to his or her resident environment or village. Non-player characters may move from one virtual environment or village to another—thereby providing an ever-changing variety of characters. Communications between different game playing platforms can be provided via portable memory devices, portable game playing devices, or conventional communications means such as networks.

 

Illustrative Claim:

1. A game-playing system comprising:

a plurality of game-playing devices, each game-playing device being configured to execute, using a processor thereof, game software, the game software including instructions to establish a unique gaming environment for the game-playing device on which it is being executed, the respective gaming environments each including resident characters and being based at least in part on random data; and

at least one physically movable, portable handheld object including non-volatile read/write memory that tangibly stores game character-related data usable in connection with the game software, the at least one object being intermittently coupleable to individual ones of the game-playing devices, wherein the at least one object is not a game-playing device in the plurality of game-playing devices;

wherein a first game-playing device from the plurality of game-playing devices executing game software thereon is configured to present a first gaming environment and, consistent with player-interaction with the game software being executed thereon:

read character-related data from the at least one object to activate an avatar in the first gaming environment, the avatar having attributes defined at least in part by the read character-related data and being usable in the first gaming environment conditioned on the at least one object being coupled to the first game-playing device,

modify the character-related data,

write the modified character-related data to the at least one object, and

make the avatar unavailable in the first gaming environment, responsive to decoupling of the at least one object from the first game-playing device, the first game-playing device still permitting player-interaction with the first gaming environment even though the at least one object is no longer coupled thereto;

wherein a second game-playing device from the plurality of game-playing devices, different from the first game-playing device, executing game software thereon, is configured to present a second gaming environment that is different from the first gaming environment and:

responsive to the at least one object being coupled to the second game-playing device after the modified character-related data has been written to the at least one object, read the modified character-related data from the at least one object to activate the avatar in the second gaming environment, the avatar now having modified attributes defined at least in part by the read modified character-related data and now being usable in the second gaming environment conditioned on the at least one object being coupled to the second game-playing device, and

further modify the modified character-related data, consistent with player-interaction with the game software being executed on the second game-playing device;

wherein the at least one object is manufactured to include a human-perceivable visual appearance that correlates with how the avatar is to be displayed in the gaming environments presented by the respective game-playing devices;

wherein successive coupling operations involving the at least one object enable a further character, different from the avatar, to be made available in the gaming environments of successively coupled-to game-playing devices without human game-player knowledge of at least the initial transfer to the at least one portable object.

U.S. Patent No. 10,726,611: Dynamic texture mapping using megatextures

Issued July 28, 2020, to Electronic Arts Inc.
Filed/Priority to August 24, 2016

Overview:

U.S. Patent No. 10,726,611 (the ‘611 patent) concerns the use of megatextures for dynamic blending of textures of an object in different instances in a game environment. This allows more variation of the same object in a game environment, while using less storage than multiple instances would traditionally take. The ‘611 patent details a method that identifies several different instances of a virtual object in the environment, and provides a first unaltered version and second altered version of the object. A megatexture is provided which includes several blend maps associated with the object, each instance of the object being associated with one of the blend maps in the megatexture. Each blend map has grid elements corresponding respectively to pixels on a location of a particular instance of the object. Each grid element has a transform value which indicates a degree of blending between the unaltered object and the particular altered instance of the object.

Thus, each instance of the object is rendered by blending the first, unaltered version, based on the transform values. Then the ‘611 patent generates instructions to output the particular instance of the object in the game environment.

This could be useful for creating variation in a game environment, because an object can be loaded with a variety of instances, appearing different in each instance. The ‘611 patent can also be used to alter objects based on player interactions, for example indicating amount of damage a player has inflicted on an object.

Abstract:

Embodiments of systems and methods described herein disclose the use of megatextures to specify blend maps for different instances of an object within a game environment. Each blend map may specify a blending between two or more different versions of the object. In some embodiments, the two or more different versions may correspond to different visual appearances associated with the object (for example, an undamaged object and a damaged object). The blend map for an instance of the object may be dynamically updated based on one or more actions within the game environment, allowing for the visual appearance of the object instance to change within the game environment in response to various actions.

 

Illustrative Claim:

1. A computer-implemented method comprising: as implemented by an interactive computing system configured with specific computer-executable instructions during runtime of a game application, the game application including a game environment, identifying a plurality of instances of a virtual object for display within the game environment; providing a first version of the virtual object and a second version of the virtual object, wherein the first version is an unaltered version of the virtual object and the second version is an altered version of the virtual object, wherein the first version and the second version of the virtual object are used for rendering each of plurality of instances of the virtual object within the game environment; providing a megatexture including a plurality of blend maps associated with the virtual object, wherein each instance of the plurality of instances of the virtual object is associated with a unique blend map of the plurality of blend maps, wherein each blend map defines a plurality of grid elements, wherein each grid element corresponds to a plurality of pixels at a defined location of a particular instance of the virtual object, wherein each defined location of the particular instance of the virtual object corresponds to the same location of the first version of the virtual object and the second version of the virtual object, wherein each grid element has a corresponding transform value used for rendering each instance of the virtual object, wherein each transform value of each blend map indicates a degree of blending between the unaltered version of the virtual object and the altered version of the virtual object at the defined location of the particular instance of the virtual object that corresponds to a particular grid element; for each instance of the virtual object of the plurality of instances of the virtual object within the game environment: identifying a particular blend map of the plurality of blend maps associated with the particular instance of the virtual object; rendering the particular instance of the virtual object by blending the first version of the virtual object with the second version of the virtual object based at least in part on the transform values of the particular blend map resulting in a rendered instance of the virtual object; and generating instructions to output the rendered instance of the virtual object within the game environment.