Thread Rating:

MathExtremist
MathExtremist
Joined: Aug 31, 2010
  • Threads: 88
  • Posts: 6526
December 2nd, 2015 at 12:39:12 PM permalink
Quote: 777

The 10-years status limitation I used is not a good one, and your comment is a clear indication of your COMPLETE lack of understanding about the doctrine of laches. This is not my legal advice to you, but I encourage to take some time to understand more about the doctrine of laches. And if you want to enhance your knowledge further, a good reading for you is the recent SCOTUS' decision on Petrella v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Inc.

My gosh, do you not even read your own cites? You just linked to the PatentlyO discussion of patent laches in SCA, which says
Quote: PatentlyO

On en banc rehearing, the Federal Circuit has ruled that the Supreme Courtís Petrella decision (eliminating the doctrine of laches for back-damages for copyright infringement) does not directly apply in the patent context.

And now you're pointing directly to Petrella as being applicable? It's always fun when attorneys cite cases that directly refute their arguments, especially when they don't even realize it.

Nothing Zcore13 said was wrong. You *don't* necessarily lose any rights if you wait to file an IP suit. You may, if laches or some other defense is found, but that's not a given.
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice." -- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
777
777
Joined: Oct 7, 2015
  • Threads: 30
  • Posts: 724
December 2nd, 2015 at 12:41:04 PM permalink
Quote: muleyvoice

Free advice is worth the price.




It is the fact that everyone comes here or any other internet sources for "free advice," but not all take the free advice at face value.
777
777
Joined: Oct 7, 2015
  • Threads: 30
  • Posts: 724
December 2nd, 2015 at 1:17:45 PM permalink
Quote: MathExtremist

My gosh, do you not even read your own cites? You just linked to the PatentlyO discussion of patent laches in SCA, which says

Quote: PatentlyO

On en banc rehearing, the Federal Circuit has ruled that the Supreme Courtís Petrella decision (eliminating the doctrine of laches for back-damages for copyright infringement) does not directly apply in the patent context.

And now you're pointing directly to Petrella as being applicable? It's always fun when attorneys cite cases that directly refute their arguments, especially when they don't even realize it.

Nothing Zcore13 said was wrong. You *don't* necessarily lose any rights if you wait to file an IP suit. You may, if laches or some other defense is found, but that's not a given.





I did not state that Petrella is applicable. Petrella was mention to give Zcore10000 specifically (and perhaps others) a broader understanding of laches.

I did NOT state that you lose your right for waiting to file lawsuit. My statement was in the context of KNOWING the current violation INTENTIONALLY not taking timely action (the fictitious example I used is for the 10 years loss of compensation). That the doctrine of laches was established as a remedy to such abuse, and I don't think anyone here is qualified to give a legal assessment about the consequent in the context which I replied to. Even though no one has the legal expertise, but we all can still provide comments based on our limited knowledge and common sense.


Edited to add original context that created the subsequent laches discussion:

My original reply to telliot is based on this context:

Quote from telliot:
"asked Roger Snow once about SHFL suing independent table game inventors over patent infringements. As I recall, he said that it wasn't worth considering until the game had a non-trivial number of placements and some longevity."
MathExtremist
MathExtremist
Joined: Aug 31, 2010
  • Threads: 88
  • Posts: 6526
December 2nd, 2015 at 7:49:25 PM permalink
Back on topic, it looks like Mr. Zink forgot a few things:
"NOTICE OF DEFICIENCIES in Attorney Case Opening RE: Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) 1 F . The following error(s) was found: No Notice of Interested Parties has been filed. A Notice of Interested Parties must be filed with every partys first appearance. See Local Rule 7.1-1. Counsel must file a Notice of Interested Parties immediately. Failure to do so may be addressed by judicial action, including sanctions."

https://search.rpxcorp.com/lit/cacdce-634412-paz-gaming-v-racing-card-derby-holdings
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice." -- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
charliepatrick
charliepatrick
Joined: Jun 17, 2011
  • Threads: 34
  • Posts: 2424
December 3rd, 2015 at 12:21:17 PM permalink
fwiw I saw the RCD game at a Coventry Showcase a few years ago and remember it had a terrible House Edge. Apparently they did try it for a while but it's no longer there. So while the game may be similar there's little, if any, money being made by it in the UK.

I also remember someone saying that Three Card Poker (or was it another game) coming out of the 10-year something - but don't know what the exact legal situation is.
777
777
Joined: Oct 7, 2015
  • Threads: 30
  • Posts: 724
December 3rd, 2015 at 12:38:32 PM permalink
Quote: muleyvoice

Free advice is worth the price.



I believe board is helpful in providing info about Vegas, AP, DI, gambling and other technical issues such as legal, patent, math and game designs. With that being said, let me pose you this question with regarding to your comment about free advice (this question is somewhat off topic, but since your well heeded advice of "free advice is worth the price" is within this thread, it is best to pose the following question to you here instead of creating a new thread/topic).

Many thanks to the contributions of many WoV members, I was able to read many fantastic game & math discussions (one example on top of my head is the memorable 10,000 consecutive of whatever event theory by MadExtremist). Of these, one common topic I noticed is the strategy for various dice and card games. Considering the potential large bet or bankroll by some members here and the absence of the strategies certified by GLI or other approved gaming agencies, how would you put the confidence on various strategies provided on this WoV board?
muleyvoice
muleyvoice
Joined: Nov 14, 2015
  • Threads: 2
  • Posts: 135
December 3rd, 2015 at 1:25:06 PM permalink
Lots of good advice on strategy, especially on WOO site. Now as to dice influence, well there are none so blind as those who will not see. Only person I know of who put his money where his mouth is was Tupp. $100 on a challenge conducted on Ahigh's table.
Buzzard won, but told Ahigh spend the $100 on his kids. Ahigh is the research expert on field trial. SooPoo set the bet guidelines and a good time was had by all.
waasnoday
waasnoday
Joined: Jan 13, 2015
  • Threads: 3
  • Posts: 162
December 3rd, 2015 at 2:06:38 PM permalink
Quote: 777

I believe board is helpful in providing info about Vegas, AP, DI, gambling and other technical issues such as legal, patent, math and game designs. With that being said, let me pose you this question with regarding to your comment about free advice (this question is somewhat off topic, but since your well heeded advice of "free advice is worth the price" is within this thread, it is best to pose the following question to you here instead of creating a new thread/topic).

Many thanks to the contributions of many WoV members, I was able to read many fantastic game & math discussions (one example on top of my head is the memorable 10,000 consecutive of whatever event theory by MadExtremist). Of these, one common topic I noticed is the strategy for various dice and card games. Considering the potential large bet or bankroll by some members here and the absence of the strategies certified by GLI or other approved gaming agencies, how would you put the confidence on various strategies provided on this WoV board?



GLI nor any other gaming agency on the casino side of things (including regulatory) ,that I am aware of, certify any strategy nor would they as that is not within their realm of operation. GLI basically certifies that a game will perform as described and follows whatever strictures are in place for the relevant regulatory structure. As far as the math and strategies detailed on the WoO website, I can state that casino staff do visit that site because of the accuracy of the math and strategies. Not sure if this has answered the question or not but hope it helps a bit.
MathExtremist
MathExtremist
Joined: Aug 31, 2010
  • Threads: 88
  • Posts: 6526
December 3rd, 2015 at 2:50:26 PM permalink
Quote: 777

Many thanks to the contributions of many WoV members, I was able to read many fantastic game & math discussions (one example on top of my head is the memorable 10,000 consecutive of whatever event theory by MadExtremist). Of these, one common topic I noticed is the strategy for various dice and card games. Considering the potential large bet or bankroll by some members here and the absence of the strategies certified by GLI or other approved gaming agencies, how would you put the confidence on various strategies provided on this WoV board?

I'm pretty sure you're referring to me, and if that was intended to be an insult rather than a typo it wasn't a very clever one. In any event, I don't recall the "memorable 10,000 consecutive of whatever event" discussion so it couldn't have been all that memorable. Did I once say that 10,000 losses in a row could happen? Because that's true. Not very likely, but still true.

To your question, betting strategies don't change the house edge and would never be certified by GLI. Playing strategies, on the other hand, are checked by tech services labs in the context of calculating the optimal-play RTP of a game. What GLI or other labs do not check are suboptimal but concise strategies, at least not unless you ask them to; they'll be happy to take your money and do the work. For example, I just submitted a tiles game through BMM and had them verify that my math was correct for both the optimal (but complicated) strategy as well as the one-line house way strategy. If the game ever gets into the market and doesn't bomb, I'd expect there would be a thread on a near-optimal but player-friendly playing strategy right here at WoV, just as there was for the game Dan just installed at GVR. Based on the high level of competence demonstrated by the members here who tend to be involved in such discussions, I would place a very high level of confidence in whatever came out of that discussion. It's easy enough to check, too. When someone says "the house edge on new game such-and-such is X% if played with strategy S" that's independently verifiable and/or easily refuted. That's why the end product of such discussions tends to yield correct results: many eyeballs on the same problem.
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice." -- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
JohnnyHawaiian
JohnnyHawaiian
Joined: Feb 23, 2014
  • Threads: 3
  • Posts: 30
May 11th, 2016 at 12:37:22 AM permalink
So the serving of RACING CARD DERBY and TONY BROWN has been a difficult task you would think that this man claimed we stole his game and so we filed on him and now hes nowhere to be found come on be a man and let's have our day in court
John R. Paz Paz Gaming Inc

  • Jump to: