TradingTechnologies DOM patent and royalty licensing fees - futures io
futures io futures trading



TradingTechnologies DOM patent and royalty licensing fees


Discussion in Platforms and Indicators

Updated by tr8er
      Top Posters
    1. looks_one ThatManFromTexas with 7 posts (4 thanks)
    2. looks_two MetalTrade with 5 posts (0 thanks)
    3. looks_3 vanberger with 5 posts (0 thanks)
    4. looks_4 NinjaTrader with 5 posts (0 thanks)
      Best Posters
    1. looks_one ThatManFromTexas with 0.6 thanks per post
    2. looks_two monpere with 0.5 thanks per post
    3. looks_3 atata with 0.3 thanks per post
    4. looks_4 RM99 with 0.3 thanks per post
    1. trending_up 14,368 views
    2. thumb_up 10 thanks given
    3. group 18 followers
    1. forum 60 replies
    2. attach_file 2 attachments




Welcome to futures io: the largest futures trading community on the planet, with well over 100,000 members
  • Genuine reviews from real traders, not fake reviews from stealth vendors
  • Quality education from leading professional traders
  • We are a friendly, helpful, and positive community
  • We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendors advertising in posts
  • We are here to help, just let us know what you need
You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community.  It's free and simple.

-- Big Mike, Site Administrator

(If you already have an account, login at the top of the page)

 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
 

TradingTechnologies DOM patent and royalty licensing fees

  #11 (permalink)
Houston,Tx
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: NinjaTrader
Broker: Mirus Futures/Zen-Fire
Trading: TF
 
ThatManFromTexas's Avatar
 
Posts: 2,302 since Feb 2010
Thanks: 1,206 given, 4,322 received


MetalTrade View Post
Monpere, I have to disagree with you.

They invented the DOM.

How would you feel when you think and create something and then your competitor says: oh this is nice, let me program the same. That's not how Intellectual Copyright works in our Western world.

Copying everybody else ideas works in other countries but it's resulting in lack of innovation.

Last time we got something useful newly invented from China was 1500 years ago.

@MetalTrade

I agree with you... as long as the patent is legitimate.

Case in point;

NTP filed suit against RIM (BlackBerry) for $1 billion dollars and got an injunction that would have forced RIM to stop doing business in the US until the suit was settled. The suit hinged on an obscure patent that NTP had bought.

Facing being shutdown, RIM settled the case for $615 million.

Several weeks later the patent office issued its second final rejection on NTP's patents -- meaning that it was almost to the point where the patents were ruled invalid.

I'm just a simple man trading a simple plan.

My daddy always said, "Every day above ground is a good day!"
Reply With Quote

Can you help answer these questions
from other members on futures io?
Convert NinjaTrader NT7 indicator to Tradestation EasyLanguage and RADARSCREEN
Platforms and Indicators
Issue meeting order entry conditions
Elite Automated NinjaTrader Trading
Last 5 minutes Label
ThinkOrSwim
Moving average with Lag reduction
NinjaTrader
Linux?
ThinkOrSwim
 
Best Threads (Most Thanked)
in the last 7 days on futures io
Spoo-nalysis ES e-mini futures S&P 500
280 thanks
Want your NinjaTrader indicator created, free?
48 thanks
VWAP for stock index futures trading?
47 thanks
What is your single biggest weakness?
32 thanks
Is Amp at risk of going under?
27 thanks
 
  #12 (permalink)
 
 
Posts: 1,081 since May 2010

Yes, I agree it's not an easy call.

But in the case of the DOM. It's clearly an invention by Trading Technologies and copied without shame by anybody who makes a trading program.

I hate paying the extremely high x-trader fee, but the X-trader dom works just so darned good. I understand they sue anybody around there about it. I would do just the same when everybody in the business copied my idea, and if I would have the funds for it. You could also reverse it, and say x-trader is so expensive because they have to sue everybody.

Reply With Quote
 
  #13 (permalink)
Quebec
 
Experience: Intermediate
Platform: NinjaTrader wt Rancho Dinero's profiling tools
Broker: AMP/CQG
Trading: ES, NQ, YM
 
trendisyourfriend's Avatar
 
Posts: 3,877 since Oct 2009
Thanks: 3,496 given, 4,947 received



MetalTrade View Post
Monpere, I have to disagree with you.

They invented the DOM.

How would you feel when you think and create something and then your competitor says: oh this is nice, let me program the same. That's not how Intellectual Copyright works in our Western world.

Copying everybody else ideas works in other countries but it's resulting in lack of innovation.

Last time we got something useful newly invented from China was 1500 years ago.

I think Bill Gate and Steve Job liked the idea and put into it a considerable amount of time to improve it.




and the improved version 1500 years later:

Reply With Quote
 
  #14 (permalink)
Market Wizard
Berlin, Europe
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: NinjaTrader, MultiCharts
Broker: Interactive Brokers
Trading: Keyboard
 
Fat Tails's Avatar
 
Posts: 9,824 since Mar 2010
Thanks: 4,237 given, 26,522 received


trendisyourfriend View Post
I think Bill Gate and Steve Job liked the idea and put into it a considerable amount of time to improve it.

The Chinese neither invented the One nor the Zero. The Zero came to us from India, and without that Zero neither Bill nor Steve would have made it very far.

The abacus requires more than two digits to perform the calculations, so compared to an IPAD it is pretty sophisticated.

Reply With Quote
 
  #15 (permalink)
Austin, TX
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: TradeStation
Trading: Futures
 
Posts: 882 since Mar 2011
Thanks: 124 given, 697 received

As long as we're wondering in this thread, I find it curious that a company would chase ghosts with respect to patent law on nebulous concepts.

Just because I combine 2 ingredients in my kitchen, doesn't give me the right to patent it and sue anyone else who happens to find it suitable.

Code is less nebulous...and easier to patent, but the idea of a particular configuration of parameters being intellectual property isn't really a solid/tenable position. Any good patent lawyer would have told them that. There are very few absolutes in a courtroom, which is why arguments range from weak to strong.....trying to patent the concept of a DOM is about as weak as trying to patent the combination of chocolate and peanut butter.........even if you COULD do it, going after every person that codes their own version isn't really feasible or practical.

The second part (feasibility and practicality) is what still plagues intellecutal and artistic rights from porn to music to movies. Just because you own the rights to something, doesn't mean that you'll be able to effectively enforce it. The RIAA can no easier stem piracy through legal means than the porn producer who's frustrated because people aren't buying his DVD's that are now on free porn sites. Both industries have been decimated recently.

The only viable solution is through technology and preventing people from accessing the intellectual property. Software companies and music/movies are making headway against black markets.

In the case of the DOM, there's really nothing to stop anyone from taking the concept and coding their own version and there's virtually no way to stop/regulate them from doing so....legally or technically.....

As I said, they'd have been better off to get a competent lawyer who could have told them this in the first place or listened to the one they had. Trying to effectively patent and regulate the use of a "DOM" is akin to trying to patent and regulate the concept of a mancave. If some other guy builds his own mancave, and you came up with the idea......good luck on collecting your perceived due compensation or preventing every other swinging richard from doing the same.


Last edited by RM99; April 5th, 2011 at 12:32 AM.
Reply With Quote
 
  #16 (permalink)
Bala, PA, USA
 
Experience: Intermediate
Platform: NinjaTrader
Broker: Mirus, IB
Trading: SPY, Oil, Euro
 
monpere's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,858 since Jul 2010
Thanks: 300 given, 3,327 received


RM99 View Post
As long as we're wondering in this thread, I find it curious that a company would chase ghosts with respect to patent law on nebulous concepts.

Just because I combine 2 ingredients in my kitchen, doesn't give me the right to patent it and sue anyone else who happens to find it suitable.

Code is less nebulous...and easier to patent, but the idea of a particular configuration of parameters being intellectual property isn't really a solid/tenable position. Any good patent lawyer would have told them that. There are very few absolutes in a courtroom, which is why arguments range from weak to strong.....trying to patent the concept of a DOM is about as weak as trying to patent the combination of chocolate and peanut butter.........even if you COULD do it, going after every person that codes their own version isn't really feasible or practical.

The second part (feasibility and practicality) is what still plagues intellecutal and artistic rights from porn to music to movies. Just because you own the rights to something, doesn't mean that you'll be able to effectively enforce it. The RIAA can no easier stem piracy through legal means than the porn produces who's frustrated because people aren't buying his DVD's that are now on free porn sites. Both industries have been decimated recently.

The only viable solution is through technology and preventing people from accessing the intellectual property. Software companies and music/movies are making headway against black markets.

In the case of the DOM, there's really nothing to stop anyone from taking the concept and coding their own version and there's virtually no way to stop/regulate them from doing so....legally or technically.....

As I said, they'd have been better off to get a competent lawyer who could have told them this in the first place or listened to the one they had. Trying to effectively patent and regulate the use of a "DOM" is akin to trying to patent and regulate the concept of a mancave. If some other guy builds his own mancave, and you came up with the idea......good luck on collecting your perceived due compensation or preventing every other swinging richard from doing the same.

I think if the DOM patent was challenge and litigated, TT would loose. I don't know if anyone has tried. TT is using the fear of litigation, and potential cost of litigation to force other companies to pay them for a concept. They know full well that these smaller companies like NinjaTrader, etc. are too small to bear the burden to litigate. Of course those companies are going to agree to pay a fee, because that fee is passed directly on to us, it costs them nothing. We are the ones being raked over the coals. It is pure extortion. Why aren't the exchanges paying TT? Because they had enough capital to be willing to go to court and challenge them. I think the moment a couple of companies start challenging the TT litigation threats from that patent, we will see that monopoly laid to rest. It is just way to difficult to litigate software.

Reply With Quote
 
  #17 (permalink)
Houston,Tx
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: NinjaTrader
Broker: Mirus Futures/Zen-Fire
Trading: TF
 
ThatManFromTexas's Avatar
 
Posts: 2,302 since Feb 2010
Thanks: 1,206 given, 4,322 received


MetalTrade View Post
Yes, I agree it's not an easy call.

But in the case of the DOM. It's clearly an invention by Trading Technologies and copied without shame by anybody who makes a trading program.

I hate paying the extremely high x-trader fee, but the X-trader dom works just so darned good. I understand they sue anybody around there about it. I would do just the same when everybody in the business copied my idea, and if I would have the funds for it. You could also reverse it, and say x-trader is so expensive because they have to sue everybody.


You're preaching to the choir...I'm the only guy on the planet that still pays for music he downloads...

I'm just a simple man trading a simple plan.

My daddy always said, "Every day above ground is a good day!"
Reply With Quote
The following user says Thank You to ThatManFromTexas for this post:
 
  #18 (permalink)
Site Administrator
Manta, Ecuador
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: My own custom solution
Trading: Emini Futures
 
Big Mike's Avatar
 
Posts: 48,723 since Jun 2009
Thanks: 31,457 given, 93,976 received

Moderator Notice
Moderator Notice



Mike

We're here to help -- just ask

For the best trading education, watch our webinars
Searching for trading reviews? Review this list

Follow us on Twitter, YouTube, and Facebook

Support our community as an Elite Member:
https://futures.io/elite/
Follow me on Twitter Visit my Facebook Visit my futures io Trade Journal Reply With Quote
 
  #19 (permalink)
Austin, TX
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: TradeStation
Trading: Futures
 
Posts: 882 since Mar 2011
Thanks: 124 given, 697 received


monpere View Post
I think if the DOM patent was challenge and litigated, TT would loose. I don't know if anyone has tried. TT is using the fear of litigation, and potential cost of litigation to force other companies to pay them for a concept. They know full well that these smaller companies like NinjaTrader, etc. are too small to bear the burden to litigate. Of course those companies are going to agree to pay a fee, because that fee is passed directly on to us, it costs them nothing. We are the ones being raked over the coals. It is pure extortion. Why aren't the exchanges paying TT? Because they had enough capital to be willing to go to court and challenge them. I think the moment a couple of companies start challenging the TT litigation threats from that patent, we will see that monopoly laid to rest. It is just way to difficult to litigate software.

The tactic is similar to SLAPP lawsuits, which is where a larger firm uses the threat of legal fees to influence the actions of smaller, less resourced entities. Even if they know they have a weak case, a large, well resourced organization can use the very threat of litigation and the impending costs to coerce others into actions more favorable to them.

This is a key area where tort reform would help tremendously, but attorneys, like our illustrious President, refuse to allow it, because they would piss off every lawyer and lobbyist involved....

Imagine the impact on medical care costs if Doctor's were able to do what they thought was right, rather than mountains of CYA policies they have to endure for insurance companies who are afraid of attorneys.....but that is a discussion for another thread. As it stands, doctors hide behind insurance policy and excessive care requirements to upsell patients for a bunch of crap they know the patient does not need.

If we enacted tort reform either at the state level and or the federal level that made the losing party pay all legal fees and burdens (in civil suits), it would totally reduce this sort of tactic.

Firms and their counsel would think VERY long and hard about bringing suits they thought were even remotely questionable, because they'd live in fear of having to pay the other sides defense costs if they lost. As it stands, it's pretty much up to a judge/jury to award counter-suit claims for legal burden and it's a bit counterintuitive.

it's as if to say...."If you're awarding someone a counter-suit claim for legal fees, why in the Sam Hell did you allow the suit in the first place." I'll tell you why. Judges and courts are just like everyone else...they're broke...they need cases to generate fees and revenue just like everyone else. The whole system needs some rework.

Reply With Quote
 
  #20 (permalink)
 
 
Posts: 1,081 since May 2010


RM99, thanks for your replies but your metaphors are completely off the balance here.

TT created a concept of a depth of market screen that was unique in the world wide trading scene. It was so good they created in a short time an absolute market leader position in trade execution. I have read that around 60% of all manual transactions are made with X-trader. Yes, it's that good.

As a X-trader user again I agree there's just no better DOM than the x-trader DOM. I learned a trading technique that how strange it might sounds don't work good without x-trader since I need to see exactly how many contracts have been traded at the bid or the ask and I need to see approx. what my order position is in the que compared to other orders.

All trading software who contains a DOM is just a shameless COPY of the efforts, creativity and investments of Trading Technologies in creating something unique that works extremely well for traders.

While in many cases with intellectual property it's a bloody tin line, but in the case of the DOM it's clear IMHO that TT deserves every credit, right and money for their invention. Again, the metaphors used are just a joke compared to the shameless copy of the DOM from X-trader from any software in this industry.

Reply With Quote



futures io Trading Community Platforms and Indicators > TradingTechnologies DOM patent and royalty licensing fees




Upcoming Webinars and Events
 

Understanding Order Flow Stops Runs & Icebergs w/Bookmap

May 28
     



Copyright © 2020 by futures io, s.a., Av Ricardo J. Alfaro, Century Tower, Panama, +507 833-9432, info@futures.io
All information is for educational use only and is not investment advice.
There is a substantial risk of loss in trading commodity futures, stocks, options and foreign exchange products. Past performance is not indicative of future results.
no new posts