May
31
2012

The Humble Indie Bundle V

Posted by at

Humble Indie Bundle V features five incredible, best-selling games plus their soundtracks (in both FLAC and MP3 formats). ”Experience the fear and paranoia of Amnesia: The Dark Descent; the intensity and impact of LIMBO; the zany characters of Psychonauts; the future-retro, audiovisual concoction of Superbrothers: Sword & Sworcery EP; and, for customers who pay more than the average price, the exquisitely crafted action-RPG, Bastion.” If you bought these games separately, it would cost around $110, but they are letting you set the price. Pay a $1 or more and you can optionally get a key to redeem the games on Steam (for Mac and Windows). The games work great on a Mac but if you need to check system requirements, they are here.

The Humble Indie Bundle V includes lots of great titles and their accompanied soundtracks, giving you plenty of unique Indie gaming to keep you out of the summer heat. You can find links to all the great games below.

There’s fourteen days left to donate, so you have plenty of time to cash in your paycheck and donate to a worthy cause; donate to the developers, the Child’s Play Charity, or the Electronic Frontier Foundation. If you like this deal, Humble Bundle is also accepting tips. They have already sold over 26,000 copies in the first 30 minutes! Be sure to check out The Humble Indie Bundle V official launch video after the break and get amped up!

Note: The Mac edition of S:S&S EP will also be popping up on Steam sometime today, plus it’ll show up on the Mac App Store before the “summer solstice”.

(more…)

Jul
18
2011

Editor’s note: This is a guest post by Steve Streza, founder of Mustacheware and developer of Todolicious. Read more about him at his blog, and follow him on Twitter.

First Lodsys. Now Kootol. It seems the Pandora’s box has been opened on patent infringement lawsuits being levied against small-scale developers. What used to be a problem that only concerned large companies with massive legal teams and tons of cash to throw at patent discovery is now something that affects indies and small companies. The independent developer community has largely ignored software patents for ages, mostly because they didn’t ever get pressured by them. It was considered too small a target to go after by patent holders, considering how many bigger targets like Apple and Microsoft were often infringing the same patents. But now, with the kind of money being thrown around in the App Store (not just Apple’s, but Google’s Android Market as well), it almost seems too easy to pursue a lawsuit against a small vendor who can either kick you a few thousand bucks or spend hundreds of thousands on a patent lawsuit that will get them nothing in return.

US patent law surrounding patents has been vague and in flux for many years. In the US, Gottschalk v. Benson in 1972, it was decided that calculations (mathematical algorithms) were not patentable. In Diamond v. Diehr in 1981, a Supreme Court ruling set the precedent that computer algorithms which were parts of a larger process (in this case, making molded rubber using computer simulations) were patentable. It wasn’t until 1994 that the Federal Circuit ruled that algorithms and data structures interpreted by machines were patentable, which basically set up the current precedent that all processes interpreted by computers can be patented. This was reaffirmed in 1998 by a piece of financial software which pooled money and redistributed it; the reason this was declared patentable was because it produced something useful, and was something a human could not do manually. Compounding all of this are trade agreements between many nations (including the US) which respects patents from one country in another.

The courts have since started backtracking on this; a few rulings in the last few years may chip away at viability of some of these patents. But it doesn’t matter for already-granted patents; they can only be invalidated by time or a court, and getting it to a court is expensive and can take years. There’s an interesting thing that happens here. A patent holder risks the invalidation of their patent if they make it to trial, and the company that infringes on the patent risks having to pay damages (and possibly legal fees) if they lose. Both companies have an incentive to avoid court, so most patent lawsuits are settled out of court, preventing the viability of the patent from ever being challenged, and allowing the patent holder to continue suing other companies.

This cycle has led to the creation of the patent troll, a company with money, a legal team, a bunch of largely-obvious patents, and…well, that’s about it. These companies spend their time and resources filing for patents and pursuing companies who infringe upon them, while not doing anything of business significance with them.

Small companies have, until now, mostly ignored the threat of patent trolls, figuring that they would never go after such a small target. However, the threat has always been there. A patent is only valid if the idea has not been done before (a concept known as “prior art”), and if the patent holder actively pursues infringers. There are defenses against this (“these guys are so small, they didn’t even show up on our radar”), but generally you have to defend your patent or risk losing it. It was merely a matter of time before patent trolls began coming after the sea of cash flowing through software.

There is justified outrage at these companies for what they’re doing. Companies like Lodsys are taking advantage of patent law to harass small developers into paying up hush-money to keep from a time- and cash-consuming legal nightmares. However, it is worth noting that these patent trolls are legally operating under the rules of a broken system. It is the system surrounding patent law that must be reformed. Patent law was invented ages ago, when innovation was expensive and took a lot of time and energy. These days, any kid with a laptop can create the next huge app. The tech industry has largely figured out how to keep competitors from reverse-engineering trade secrets through a combination of mathematical and cryptographic tools. Don’t steal your way to a better product; compete your way there.

Whether Apple or Google figures out a way to shut Lodsys up is irrelevant. The patent troll hydra is out in the open; paying off one of them will cause every patent holder to consider pursuing developers with similar tenacity. With at least one indie developer withdrawing their apps from the US market so far, this spells a dark time for innovation. But only because we have been so willing to ignore the problem for so long.

With a series of blog posts published earlier today, Lodsys has confirmed [via MacRumors] that they’ve started filing lawsuits against app developers allegedly infringing patents related to in-app purchases and upgrade links in their mobile applications. Lodsys initially said that they would give developers 21 days to license the patents before filing any lawsuits, but the firm decided to change its schedule in order to defend against Apple’s legal response, which showed support for iOS developers and claimed third-party “app makers” were not infringing any patent as Apple is already licensing patents from Lodsys.

Why did Lodsys sue some App Developers on May 31, 2011

Lodsys chose to move its litigation timing to an earlier date than originally planned, in response to Apple’s threat, in order to preserve its legal options.

As for why they have decided to target small, indie developers who don’t have the resources to legally defend themselves, Lodsys writes:

Why are you targeting Apple developers or Android developers? Why are you picking on small developers who cannot defend themselves?

This story is about accountability for actions. If you are a Developer, it’s about knowledge about the scope and risks of your own business.

Lodsys has only one motivation: we want to get paid for our rights.

Lodsys also posted a response to Apple’s claims that third-party developers using Apple’s SDK and agreeing to the company’s terms are not infringing patents from Lodsys. They company also says they’ve sent a letter to Apple’s legal team, which Apple can publish in its entirety if they want to.

The letter was very surprising as Apple and Lodsys were in confidential discussions and there was clearly disagreement on the interpretation of the license terms of Apple’s agreement.  Before, during and after these interactions, Lodsys has carefully considered this issue and consulted several legal experts to consider Apple’s claims.  We stand firm and restate our previous position that it is the 3rd party Developers that are responsible for the infringement of Lodsys’ patents and they are responsible for securing the rights for their applications.  Developers relying on Apple’s letter do so to their own detriment and are strongly urged to review Apple’s own developer agreements to determine the true extent of Apple’s responsibilities to them.

Lodsys previously explained that usage of in-app purchases would cost developers 0.575% of their US revenue over the period the technology was implemented — for example, an app that generates $1 million in revenue  in one year would pay $5,750 to Lodsys. Finally, Lodsys says they’ll send $1,000 as reimburse to developers hit by the lawsuit if the whole story turns out to be wrong:

While it is true that Apple and Lodsys have an obvious dispute about the scope of Apple’s license to the Lodsys Patents, we are willing to put our money where our mouth is and pay you something if we are wrong.  Therefore, Lodsys offers to pay $1,000 to each entity to whom we have sent an infringement notice for infringement on the iOS platform, or that we send a notice to in the future, if it turns out that the scope of Apple’s existing license rights apply to fully license you with respect to our claim relating to your App on Apple iOS.

As many previously suggested after Apple’s response, the story is far from over and Lodsys appears to be pursuing its agenda by suing developers that don’t agree to pay licensing fees. Several bloggers broke down Lodsys’ patent claims in the past weeks, and the EFF even came out and said Apple should stand up for its developers.

Update: Florian Mueller of FOSSpatents tweets the names of the companies and developers sued by Lodsys today.

iOS Game Developers –  Is $0.99 Too Low?

Interesting discussion over at Pocketful of Megabytes. The author concludes:

So is $0.99 really too low? Well, yes and no. It’s not too low, because that’s where it needs to be for games in this ruthless and uncharted territory to prosper (and because consumers love cheap goods), but it is too low because it inaccurately depicts the worth of a game’s contents. Without higher profits, money cannot be spent on improving the overall quality of the content found therein. Low profits mean low budgets and low budgets mean cheaply-made apps… the price tag is low out of necessity. It’s not ideal, but we’re stuck with it.

With $0.99 apps you attract more customers, but hard work is undervalued. On the other hand it is true that you never know what app you’re going to buy (no trials), but we also have to consider Apple’s 30% cut on those .99 cents.

So here’s an idea. What if Apple discontinued the $0.99 price tag, and automatically raised all prices to $1.99 — thus making it the lowest price point? Perhaps a more feasible business model for indie developers?

Would that stop you from buying the next Angry Birds or Trainyard?

A couple of pals under the name Satarii have been working out of a garage-office for the past year perfecting the Satarii Star, an iPhone dock that follows your every move. In conjunction with a wearable tracker, the Satarii is a rotary base that follows you around around a scene such as your living-room. FaceTime conversations would be rather awesome when you could grab a cup of coffee without having to worry about the ol’ shaky cam, and imagine the possibilities in self-producing quality video? Imagine the MacStories reviews that could come of this thing! We’re pretty excited about this neat gadget because it’s a novel idea. Support the team and help Satarii reach their goal of $20,000 so we can see this thing get some legs.

[IndieGoGo via Engadget]

Adam Saltsman (aka Adam Atomic) is the man behind Canabalt, seriously one of the best “indie games” ever released in the last decade. What’s Canabalt? It’s a parkour-inspired game where you have to run and jump to avoid obstacles. Actually, the character automatically runs and you only have to press the jump button – or tap the screen in the iPhone and iPad versions.

The following footage was produced by James Swirsky and the team behind Indie Game: The Movie, due out next year. This segment won’t be included in the final movie. Check it out below. [Indie Game: The Movie via Engadget]

(more…)