Write at least 2-3 pages long analyzing your selected case study with respect to the discussion questions.

Please note:

• Your writing should be according to APA styles.
• Include at least two references.

CASE STUDY I HAVE CHOOSEN:

2 Intellectual Property Fight Over Virtual Reality Headset

The Oculus Rift is a virtual reality headset developed and manufactured by Oculus VR, a technology company founded in 2012 by Palmer Luckey. The Rift, released in March 2016, enables users to experience virtual tourism, play first-person shooter games, and participate in other highly realistic games. A powerful gaming desktop or laptop is required to run Oculus software titles and deliver detail- rich graphics to the two high-resolution displays.

Oculus VR was purchased by Facebook in March 2014 for $2 billion. Although Oculus VR positioned the Rift to become the dominant virtual reality headset in the gaming market, Facebook has much bigger plans for the developing technology. According to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, the company plans to "make Oculus a platform for many other experiences. Imagine enjoying a courtside seat at a game, studying in a classroom of students and teachers all over the world or consulting with a doctor face-to- facejust by putting on goggles in your home. This is really a new communication platform."

ZeniMax, founded in 1986, creates and publishes original interactive entertainment content for consoles, computers, and handheld/wireless devices. It has a number of operating divisions, including Bethesda Game Studios, Battle Cry Studios, and Tango Gameworks. ZeniMax's intellectual properties include The Elder Scrolls, an action role-playing game, and the popular Doom and Quake first-person shooter video games series, along with several other successful video game franchises.

ZeniMax filed a lawsuit just months after Facebook acquired Oculus, claiming that Oculus cofounder and Rift inventor Palmer Luckey, CTO John Carmack (a former high-level ZeniMax employee), and several other former ZeniMax employees who are now working at Oculus built the Rift based on millions of dollars' worth of ZeniMax's research and copyrighted code developed over the course of several years. ZeniMax alleged that the Rift device was "primitive" until Carmack made improvements based on his knowledge from his work at ZeniMax. The company raised the allegation that Carmack worked on Oculus software while still employed at ZeniMax with the hopes that the court would rule that ZeniMax owns that work, even if it is markedly different from code previously owned by ZeniMax.

Oculus denied the allegations, saying the lawsuit arose shortly after Facebook purchased the company because ZeniMax saw a "chance for a quick payout." Oculus claimed that its products do not contain a single line of ZeniMax code.

In February 2017, a jury in Dallas, Texas, awarded $500 million to ZeniMax after finding that Oculus cofounder Palmer Luckey, and by extension Oculus, failed to honor a nondisclosure agreement. However, the jury found that Oculus did not steal or misappropriate trade secrets as contended by ZeniMax. Oculus was ordered to pay $200 million for breaking the nondisclosure agreement and an additional $50 million for copyright infringement. Oculus and Luckey each must also pay $50 million for false designation of origin for lying about the origin of its products. Former Oculus CEO Brendan Iribe, who now leads a PC VR division within Facebook, must also pay $150 million for false designation.

Oculus, which plans to appeal the verdict, issued a statement following the ruling asserting that "Oculus products are built with Oculus technology. Our commitment to the long-term success of VR remains the same, and the entire team will continue the work they've done since day one, developing VR technology that will transform the way people interact and communicate."

Critical Thinking Questions At the time of this writing, it is unclear what impact the verdict in this lawsuit this will have. Do research to see if this lawsuit had a negative impact on Facebook's forays into the world of virtual reality, the sale of Oculus Rift headsets, Facebook profits, and/or its stock price.

It is entirely possible that two programmers could write very similar code to solve the same simple problemsay a program to play tic-tac-toe. However, as the problem being addressed grows in size and complexity, the number of ways to code a solution also grows. This can create a temptation for one programmer to "paraphrase" ideas taken from another programmer's work, rather than writing original code. How might such "paraphrasing" be detected? Should paraphrasing of another's code be considered copyright or patent infringement? Why or why not?

Do research to learn the current status of the appeal of this lawsuit. Write a few brief paragraphs summarizing your findings as well as your feelings about this lawsuit.

Sources: Jay Yarow, "The Only Explanation of Facebook Buying Oculus for $2 Billion That Makes Any Sense," Business Insider, March 26, 2014, www.businessinsider.com/why-mark-zuckerberg-bought- oculus-for-2-billion-2014-3; Klint Finley, "That Whole Oculus Lawsuit Hinges on What Makes Code 'New'," Wired, January 20, 2017, https://www.wired.com/2017/01/whole-oculus-lawsuit-hinges-makes- code-new/; Selena Larson, "Facebook Loses $500 Million Oculus Lawsuit," CNN Money, February 2, 2017, http://money.cnn.com/2017/02/01/technology/zenimax-oculus-lawsuit-500-million/; Timothy Poon and Brian Crecente, "Oculus Lawsuit Ends with Half Billion Dollar Judgment Awarded to ZeniMax," Polygon, February 1, 2017, www.polygon.com/2017/2/1/14474198/oculus-lawsuit-verdict; Michelle Castillo, "Facebook Ordered to Pay $500 Million in Damages Over VR Suit," CNBC, February 1, 2017, www.cnbc.com/2017/02/01/facebook-loses-vr-case.html.