Re: [3D-Stereograms] Re: svs 3ds max
- My uneducated guess is the method for creating the image, if unique,
can be patented and the image itself, can be copyrighted.
Actually any image you create, as long as it is your creation, is
automatically copyrighted. Even if you do not add the circle C
copyright sign. But if you register your images with the US Copyright
Office http://www.copyright.gov/ and you litigate against someone who
has used all or part of your image, and you win your case, by US law
the person you sued has to pay your court costs as well as any damages.
You can register an entire website or book or portfolio of images at
one time for a very reasonable fee. Something like $25.
At 09:48 PM 4/30/2006, you wrote:
>Hi Ron,Gary W. Priester
>Actually when it comes to patents "how it's made
>really doesn't matter" is not a true statement. How its made matters
>a great deal. I am not applying for a patent for cross-view
>stereograms. I am applying a patent for a very specific method for
>creating and optimizing them. I have revealed many, but not all
>aspects of the method which comprise the claims in the patent
>The patents granted to N.E. Thing (Magic Eye) were for methods for
>creating stereograms, not the stereograms themselves. There are also
>patents for several stereographic image types that have been granted
>to various individuals over the years. All this is extremely easy to
>look up on the USPTO site.
>"Novel" means something very specific to the USPTO. You can research
>the patent law if you like. Even under the scenario you detailed,
>where something akin to the method I propose was used as an
>intermediate step to produce parallel stereograms, a case can and
>will be made that my method is novel in the context of the claims I
>made in the application.
>Of course I will be challenged by the patent office. Every one is.
>Neither you nor I get to decide what will or won't get granted. That
>will be up to the examaminer. So, about a year from now we will know
>the answer. In the meantime, I will have to disclose to the USPTO my
>recently acquired knowledge of the prior art you have revealed to me
>on this board.
>By the way, did you receive the package with examples of SVS
>animations and stereograms applied to truncated cones (drink cups)?
>--- In 3D-Stereograms@yahoogroups.com, "ron labbe" <ron@...> wrote:
> > Barney writes
> > >>The Magic Eye series was groundbreaking. Your contribution of
> > inclusion of 3d objects, while implemented in a different manner
> > than my method, was a significant step forward in the field of
> > stereographic art. I know it inspired and influenced me, and I am
> > sure the others on this board will say the same.<<
> > Thanks, Barney... looking at what's being done now, a lot of MAGIC
> > stuff was pretty boring! Still magic, though...
> > In any case, the method you described utilizing 3ds max (well, it
> > max then!) was exactly how I did many of the images- except that we
> > couldn't use cross-viewing (Tom, the big boss, hated cross-viewing-
> > he wanted to be consistent) so I had to go into Photoshop and
> > the pieces (via alpha channel) and reset for parallel... I tried
> > him to try cross view (especially for big images!) but he was
> > It's just hard to see how your "svs" is patentable... how it's made
> > really doesn't matter. You could take a photo of any repeating
> > and it woud be the same thing... I can cross-view the keys on my
> > keyboard and they are deeper than normal (ignoring the letters, of
> > course). 3Dimka's Chess Game is really the same as well...
> > "single view" stereogram! (Be fun to do an actual photo of the same
> > scene!)
> > ron
> > ron labbe
> > studio 3D
>Yahoo! Groups Links
Clean, Functional Web Site and Logo Design
Illustrations and 3D Stereograms