The common general knowledge in this case
The common general knowledge in this case
Mr Viant identified the invention of the Patent as combining four elements: (i) specially adapted karts, (ii) a locating system for tracking the karts (often referred to in the evidence as a tracking system), (iii) a server to implement the game engine (i.e. to interact with and coordinate the tracking system, the projectors and the driving instruction of the player such that XR karting can be experienced by the player, which depends on the server’s software) and (iv) a visualisation system for allowing the kart pilots to see the game world (i.e. a projection system). He said that there were commercially available options for all the elements of the invention and that each of these options was part of the CGK. This was common ground.
- Heading
- Judge Hacon
- The Patent
- The claims
- The witnesses
- Person skilled in the art
- The Law
- The skilled team in this case
- Which of the experts was closer to the skilled team?
- The common general knowledge in this case
- BlackTrax
- The prior art
- Inventive step
- The Battlekart Disclosure
- The MIT Disclosure
- The Disney Application
- Conclusions
![IP-2024-000061 - [2025] EWHC 1936 (IPEC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_AacSvIO.png)