COU gets approved for Patent

COU got their 2nd of hopefully 3 major pieces of intellectual property. The USPTO approved our design patent as of Friday. Previously, we were granted a federally registered trademark and the utility patent is still pending but our argument seems very consistent with the recent case law changes so we are going to fight like hell to get the hat-trick.

Congrats!

Congrats!

Thanks gentlemen.

I was a little hesitant about posting this for fear of being a little too self-serving but I see that a lot of aspiring game designers astutely check out this site so I figured it is good for them to see the IP that is still available for game protection.

If there are any such people, although I am very proud to have a federally registered trademark and a design patent, the big one is the utility. The trademark protects the COU brand and the design protects the layout and game presentation. The actual nuts and bolts of the rules that make the game what it is (best game for new players) are covered in the utility patent which is still pending.

I've been told that there is no way I will win the utility patent fight but I not only think I will but I hope it ends up being a gift to the industry as the new standard b/c original games that are not based on or a variant of an existing game deserve such protection. It is so hard to come up with an original game that doesn't suck.

Kobalj, apologies if it's in a different thread but where can I try this game out? I'm always down to play something that doesn't suck haha

Casino games need to be given a judicial exception. You need to find a judge that can actually understand how it's not just rearranging numbers (probably only a gambler tbh) AND feels comfortable enough with IP to make a precedent setting decision (many judges are uncomfortable with IP because it's kind of a subset of law). Definitely won't be cheap, best of luck with the utility.

Ahiromu you have nailed it my friend. I said we were going to pull it off but I did not say it would be cheap and/or easy. lol

There is a freemium app in the appstore. If you run out of chips don't buy more fake money as you get a free $500 in fake money every two hours.

https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/casino-over-under/id982962291?ls=1&mt=8

My one partner who programmed the appstore app is just about done with an html5 version and I am also discussing having a face book social game made in the near future.

It sucks being "that guy" but as poster hinted at, this is really a nothing-burger as Kevin O'leary would say. It has no real bearing on protecting a game, especially a game with only 1 placement.

Should someone deem it necessary to copy this game, they could change the layout around so it doesn't match the current layout, and use a different name to get around a design patent and trademark on the name. I should clarify, that would not be something any company would do in the USA anyway.

The real ground breaking news would be a utility patent. That's something worth posting about.

Good luck in your journey.

Quote: kobalj

There is a freemium app in the appstore. If you run out of chips don't buy more fake money as you get a free $500 in fake money every two hours.

https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/casino-over-under/id982962291?ls=1&mt=8

My one partner who programmed the appstore app is just about done with an html5 version and I am also discussing having a face book social game made in the near future.

Thanks, I will try it out.

There is no doubt that a design patent is not as significant as a utility but we will end up with both. I can promise you when the utility comes thru I am definitely going to announce it loud and proud. As far as any company doing this or that, anytime any person or business entity violates either my design patent, my pending utility or my federally registered trademark they can expect to hear form me shortly thereafter. In fact, I just had to defend my IP rights against someone who created an html5 game that I felt infringed on my brand and my patents that were at that time only pending. Fortunately, it just so happened to be a reasonable person as he immediately changed the name, some rules and even opted to abandon using a standard 52 card deck. I consider myself very lucky he was as cool as he was b/c often times there are no winners in litigation even when one side technically ends up the prevailing party.

As far as the placements comment goes I suppose you must be one of the legends that visit this site or work for one of the industry giants b/c for me getting placements is really tough. That being said, I got the game licensed in one jurisdiction and another one pending in another. I'm very proud of that and even though it hasn't been easy and the game has only been played in one casino officially my confidence has only grown. This game is going to be around long after I pass. I created it to give casinos a game tailor made to suit the needs of a casino's beginner players and there are no other games that fit that bill as well as COU. As time goes by, the game will grow in popularity and I will continue to accumulate licenses one jurisdiction at a time. Stay tuned.....

Quote: kobalj

As far as the placements comment goes I suppose you must be one of the legends that visit this site or work for one of the industry giants b/c for me getting placements is really tough. That being said, I got the game licensed in one jurisdiction and another one pending in another. I'm very proud of that and even though it hasn't been easy and the game has only been played in one casino officially my confidence has only grown. This game is going to be around long after I pass. I created it to give casinos a game tailor made to suit the needs of a casino's beginner players and there are no other games that fit that bill as well as COU. As time goes by, the game will grow in popularity and I will continue to accumulate licenses one jurisdiction at a time. Stay tuned.....

Kobal, I get it, you are excited about COU and think it has a big future. Most developers believe their new game solves a big problem in the table games world. Geez, I started out thinking the pit needed a new card/dice combination game for crying out loud....and the market handed me a resounding "no" as an answer to that theory.

Here is the thing: The only event that matters for any new game is placements that stick...that is it, nothing else.

It's interesting to talk about IP, game features and why this or that is so unique about any game...but it comes down to installs sticking and building a player base that keeps coming back to play again and again...everything else is just noise.

If you want to announce something "loud & proud", make an announcement that the upcoming PA installation has been on the floor for 12 months...that will be a big deal!! But it hasn't happened yet. To date I believe you have had one free for life trial installation that is no longer on the floor at Magnolia Bluffs. Look it is huge to get on the floor anywhere, but again, staying on the floor is the real target. Failed trials actually move a game backwards on the success metric.

I believe all that SM777 was trying to say is right now, you kinda got a game & a dream with a Trademark & a Design Patent. Which is fine, but after the Magnolia Bluffs trial, there is much to prove between where COU is now and a "game that is going to be around long after you pass." Having a realistic perspective about where COU is today will only help your chances of success in the future.

The PA installation will be critical for COU...I wish you good fortune and favorable variance on the journey forward!

The PA installation is key but I have a lot more planned for this game than the casino installations. I don't see any need to rush things either. I'm just getting warmed up. I'm working on having the skill based version made into a wonderful ETG; there's a really cool social game version coming out in little while and a html5 that plays just like the appstore app. I think my comments about the patents came across the wrong way. I'm sure you know that when you have a patent for anything it is wise to make sure you aggressively defend your rights as doing so literally gets considered in future cases that may arise. So when someone says "oh it's no big deal to have a design patent and if someone wants to steal your game they just have to do x, y and Z" it immediately triggers me into defensive mode. It's no biggie though. It's almost like a knee-jerk reaction.

As far as my installation Magnolia Bluffs goes I am pleased. I understandably do not have access to things like I did during the field trial but I never was told they dumped the game forever they just use it sporadically. If you have evidence of something else please show me but that is as much as I know. It was always part-time even in the field trial. That's why the field trial lasted so long. I have 10 months of play mostly on the weekend that ended up producing a nice hold. No reason to abandon ship based on a sample size too small to mean anything other than the MGC felt it was worthy of a license. As far as me seeing the beginner game void goes it is true that is just my opinion. I have a lot of crazy opinions that end up dead wrong so maybe I am seeing things. Very possible. Time will tell. Trust me the day I get convinced this project is not working out I will say good bye and you can celebrate being "the guy" that told me so. Let's see how things play out.

Probably a 90% chance it doesn't work out long term, but you've made it further than most ever do.


ZCore13

Quote: kobalj

The PA installation is key but I have a lot more planned for this game than the casino installations. I don't see any need to rush things either. I'm just getting warmed up. I'm working on having the skill based version made into a wonderful ETG; there's a really cool social game version coming out in little while and a html5 that plays just like the appstore app. I think my comments about the patents came across the wrong way. I'm sure you know that when you have a patent for anything it is wise to make sure you aggressively defend your rights as doing so literally gets considered in future cases that may arise. So when someone says "oh it's no big deal to have a design patent and if someone wants to steal your game they just have to do x, y and Z" it immediately triggers me into defensive mode. It's no biggie though. It's almost like a knee-jerk reaction.

As far as my installation Magnolia Bluffs goes I am pleased. I understandably do not have access to things like I did during the field trial but I never was told they dumped the game forever they just use it sporadically. If you have evidence of something else please show me but that is as much as I know. It was always part-time even in the field trial. That's why the field trial lasted so long. I have 10 months of play mostly on the weekend that ended up producing a nice hold. No reason to abandon ship based on a sample size too small to mean anything other than the MGC felt it was worthy of a license. As far as me seeing the beginner game void goes it is true that is just my opinion. I have a lot of crazy opinions that end up dead wrong so maybe I am seeing things. Very possible. Time will tell. Trust me the day I get convinced this project is not working out I will say good bye and you can celebrate being "the guy" that told me so. Let's see how things play out.

It was definitely a weird knee jerk reaction to my factual comment. Design patent on a table game layout is worthless. You know that. I'm not breaking news here.

Quote: kobalj

... far as my installation Magnolia Bluffs goes I am pleased. I understandably do not have access to things like I did during the field trial but I never was told they dumped the game forever they just use it sporadically....

What does they "use it sporadically" mean? A game is either on the floor or it isn't. Properties don't roll out games for a random weekend and then put them back in the closet.

If you walked into Magnolia Bluffs today, COU isn't on the floor, correct? Not having a game on the floor 12 months after launch is a failed trial. Labeling it anything else is inaccurate.

Getting a game approved for play in a jurisdiction is meaningless. Just take a look at NV's list of approved games compared to games that are actually on casino floors...it isn't pretty.

Focus on PA...your next installation is all that matters as it relates to COU making any headway in a live format. When is Mt Airy slated to go live with COU?

I have proof from launch date until the hearing where I got the license. That was 10 months and the license approved as of 12/16/2016. I stopped getting info after that point but I have been told they have used it sporadically since then and the last written communication says they intend on using it in the future. I am fine w that. I don't consider the field trial that got me my first regulatory license a failure. There is limited table game space and every casino is different. I have spoken w enough casinos to feel confident in saying that there will be plenty more placements.

I respectfully disagree that being licensed is meaningless. A casino in Mississippi has the ability to put the game in tomorrow with if they want. I want that to be true for as many casinos as possible and the only way to do that is obtain legal licenses. Given the specific role I want the game to play it is not a situation that is ripe for deeming the game a success or failure at this point.

As far as mount airy goes that will start whenever the Pa Gaming Commission is ready to do so. I'm presently working w them to get there. I hope it won't be too much longer but as I said I have plenty other exciting complimentary projects in working on for social games, mobile and online play. It's not 1990. There's a lot more to this than land based casino placements exclusively. At least in my opinion.

I respectfully disagree. A design patent prevents anyone from using a layout that is substantially similar to mine. I conceded the utility is more important but the design patent is far from worthless.

Quote: Zcore13

Probably a 90% chance it doesn't work out long term, but you've made it further than most ever do.


ZCore13

Thanks Z score 13. I've been told only 1% of games created ever see the inside of a casino and we have pulled that off. But then I've heard only 1% of those make it long term. You on the other hand are giving us a much better chance at 10%. Thanks for the kind words but if I listened to people's thoughts on if this can work or not I would have bailed a long time ago.

I saw a path so I took a chance and went for it. After doing so the path is even more clear than before and I expect to pull it off. I know that's what every inventor thinks but not every inventor has an original stand-alone game that even though is new it's based on a concept that is very familiar to most people. That's a potent mix and one day I predict you will agree.

Rumor is some table games may have gotten patented recently. Could that mean things are changing for everyone? Could be horrific news for Galaxy

Quote: SM777

Rumor is some table games may have gotten patented recently. Could that mean things are changing for everyone? Could be horrific news for Galaxy

I don't understand why does it make horrific news for Galaxy. Shouldn't it be a welcome news to everyone?

Quote: SM777

Rumor is some table games may have gotten patented recently. Could that mean things are changing for everyone? Could be horrific news for Galaxy

I believe that is just electronic versions of games (though i'm not 100% sure).

Quote: kobalj

I have proof from launch date until the hearing where I got the license. That was 10 months and the license approved as of 12/16/2016. I stopped getting info after that point but I have been told they have used it sporadically since then and the last written communication says they intend on using it in the future. I am fine w that. I don't consider the field trial that got me my first regulatory license a failure. There is limited table game space and every casino is different. I have spoken w enough casinos to feel confident in saying that there will be plenty more placements.

We have different definitions of a "successful trial"...I don't associate terms like "sporadic use" & "intent on future use" with games that had a successful trial.

Quote: kobalj

I respectfully disagree that being licensed is meaningless. A casino in Mississippi has the ability to put the game in tomorrow with if they want. I want that to be true for as many casinos as possible and the only way to do that is obtain legal licenses...

There is a large gap between a casino's legal ability to put a game on the floor and a casino actually installing a game for live play.

Quote: kobalj

As far as mount airy goes that will start whenever the Pa Gaming Commission is ready to do so. I'm presently working w them to get there. I hope it won't be too much longer but as I said I have plenty other exciting complimentary projects in working on for social games, mobile and online play. It's not 1990. There's a lot more to this than land based casino placements exclusively. At least in my opinion.

With Mt Airy's LOI being issued last December, what is the "Over Under Date" for when COU will be live at Mt. Airy?

The o/u on Pa: I think anyone can tell you that Pa really goes above and beyond and closely evaluates applications which tends to make them take longer than other jurisdictions. To each their own I suppose. I don't know how much longer it will be as it is out of my hands but as soon as I have a better indication I will let you know.

The trial: When the field trial itself is done on a part time basis and still gets you a license I think that is huge. The reason I say that is b/c I have come to learn that the results have little to no impact on the casinos I have talked to since b/c of the fact it was only offered part time. In one meeting I had since the trial has concluded I mentioned the hold % and was told that it is too small of a sample size to mean anything and that a game only offered on the weekends doesn't tell a casino much of anything good or bad. I was literally told "so, the game hasn't really had its test yet." So I am grateful to have a license but still looking for my first full time shot for the land based route.

Lastly, there reason I feel there is more options than just the land-based is b/c of a deal that should be going public real soon. We are finalizing a deal with a company that is going to give us some much needed assistance from people with big-time experience who have achieved big-time success that should get us an incredible opportunity with ETG's. There will be a press release in the very near future. Being outsiders that are new to this, we really needed to team up with individuals that possess the background we lack and we are thrilled to have the opportunity to see what players think of our game on ETG's. We hope that the ETG's will help the land based and vice versa. In addition to that we are also looking into online and social games. I think anyone of those can potentially ignite the others.

I have nothing but respect for you and everyone else in here b/c you guys have paved the path that we are presently walking down with our project and you have been very open and helpful in giving me advice. I am grateful and I apologize if I was abrasive.

That's great news, kobalj. I must admit that reading this thread has enlightened me as an aspiring game inventor more than I dare say at this moment. It is so very easy for people to make broad comments about the success or failure of your invention, but coming from someone who is currently pursuing a utility patent for a playing card game, let me say that I am totally recognizing the enormous amount of time, money, sleepless nights, heart break and joy that goes into this daunting process. The very fact that you have accomplished a design patent, are currently prosecuting a utility patent, have your hands on a web app (or at least have a developer working with you) is proof positive that your game is at the very least sound and once (or if) your utility patent comes through, there's no telling what success the game can accomplish. I think most would agree that success can be defined by different metrics, and by my standards, you have experienced a lot of it.

I'll be filing my utility patent hopefully this month and will be posting my game to this very forum soon also. You have to be willing and ready to defend and protect your invention in this environment, while at the same time remaining receptive to feedback and criticism. This can be really hard when you're in the middle of the storm of invention. The swells of success and the troughs of criticism would make the faint at heart either jump overboard or empty the contents of their stomachs! I for one look forward to your future posts and wish you all the success with your game.

Also, did you file on your own or did you use a representative? I'm wondering because the USPTO has a strict 'dual communication' policy and won't speak with you if you are being represented by an agent or attorney. I'm probably going to prosecute my own utility application and was wondering about your experience with your examiner.

Finally, it must have been expensive getting the license for your game and the field trial fees (and all done without a utility patent). I won't ask how this is being financed, but what made you decide to file for a license without patent protection? Seems a bit risky. (Sorry if I may have missed something in previous posts)

Congrats Kobalj! I've been following your progress for quite some time and I've very happy for you!