The filing points to a possible ad-supported model for PC and console games that is less disruptive than the approaches commonly used in mobile titles.
Watching an ad would earn players another block of ad-free play time, called a “credit”
Putting aside that it’s idiotic anticonsumer patent.
May I just ask here. How tf this even gets patented? Should I patent the act of showing the advertisement sign to my neighbors every time they open their door, so I can get exclusivity rights ownership on doing such an idiotic thing? Like why it gets accepted? It doesn’t sound even remotely technologically meaningful, neither it needs to withstand concurrency. It’s just a waste of tax money.
It hasn’t, yet, afaict. Applying for a patent != it being granted.
As to the latent question of why Microsoft seems confident enough to try:
Because the times of a patent requiring to clear a reasonable inventive threshold (to actually be a motor for innovation) are far behind us. These days, patents’ principal (not exclusive) purpose imho is so big corporations can sue each other to grab some of the others’ earnings.
Putting aside that it’s idiotic anticonsumer patent. May I just ask here. How tf this even gets patented? Should I patent the act of showing the advertisement sign to my neighbors every time they open their door, so I can get exclusivity rights ownership on doing such an idiotic thing? Like why it gets accepted? It doesn’t sound even remotely technologically meaningful, neither it needs to withstand concurrency. It’s just a waste of tax money.
It hasn’t, yet, afaict. Applying for a patent != it being granted.
As to the latent question of why Microsoft seems confident enough to try:
Because the times of a patent requiring to clear a reasonable inventive threshold (to actually be a motor for innovation) are far behind us. These days, patents’ principal (not exclusive) purpose imho is so big corporations can sue each other to grab some of the others’ earnings.
Loading screen games was patented, this doesn’t seem much different.