Patent World | A Lawyer's Take on Nintendo vs PalWorld

[@KPX01]

Regardless i still feel putting patent for game mechanic soo simple like the mere concept of aiming and capture is detrimental to the industry. A lot of game mechanic is derive from older/other game and nintendo also uses them.

[@mrbubbles6468]

True. That’s why most companies are smart enough not to obviously steal from others so the bigger players do not come down with the hammer. Although being ok with taking other peoples dtuff and building upon it is mostly a thing in the west, not elsewhere.

[@riotman3579]

@@KPX01 patent is restricting every dev and studios creativity from when creating a game is disgusting and greedy behaviour

[@IntoxicusFreeman]

It is and this is the problem w/ patent law as it is now. It allows entities to gatekeep ideas(not actual inventions) This is an issue beyond gaming.

[@rueblie2627]

@@KPX01 You would be correct in saying that having a patent on the concept of aiming and capturing is bad, which is why patents like those aren’t granted. The patents Nintendo holds are much more specific than that and take several pages of text and diagrams to explain.

[@KPX01]

@@rueblie2627 at the end of the day it still amount to anything similar can get sued

[@INeedTogepi]

Pirate Software pointed out that Pocket Pair released a game called Craftopia in 2020 that has the same monster catching mechanic but with pyramids instead of spheres.

[@HoegLaw]

Right. And that could be a factor, but more likely it's that the primary use case for their patent is when they are otherwise mad, and Craftopia didn't rise to that level.

[@thieftheodore]

In craftopia there's no aiming mode where the camera slightly change before you throw the capturing tool. Because of this the patent only applicable to palworld and legend of arceus

[@iivin4233]

@@HoegLaw Does the fact that they didn't defend their patent in the case of Craftopia affect their claims now? It seems to me that the difference in degree and not in kind.

[@Stratelier]

@@HoegLaw When you phrase it that way, it starts to sound A LOT like selective/malicious prosecution, which is nigh-impossible to prove in courts but doesn't bode well with public opinion either. I might even call it "ulterior prosecution", in that the desired effect is the damage/costs incurred by merely _initiating_ the suit at all, regardless of outcome.

[@HoegLaw]

Not really. You can argue equitable defenses (estoppel, laches) but they are inherently weaker/at the mercy of the court.

[@Dair101]

Going off this, how would someone even make a monster capturing game without Nintendo going after them? Seems like a monopoly on this genre, which then can never get improved on. It's like if COD patented the HUD for their games, so no 1st person shooters could have a HUD, that would kill the entire genre.

[@richtersundeen6105]

@@Dair101 Nintendo is perfectly happy to have Digimon, Yokai Watch, Cassette Beasts, Dragon Quest Monsters, and Shin Megami Tensei sold on the e-Shop right alongside Pokemon. None of them involve capturing monsters with balls, for one thing.

[@rueblie2627]

The way everybody else made theirs. There’s a million and one monster collection games out there, Nintendo only has the patents on very specific mechanics relating to one way to do it.

[@japexican007]

@@richtersundeen6105 so the main guy said it doesn't feel right for nintendo to patent capturing x with y and your response is: it's okay look at these other games that don't use that patent, which has nothing to to with nintendo having a monopoly on that patent, now lets think about if every single game company decided to patent every single mechanic, now what's your excuse?

[@teamchaos5101]

@@japexican007 my excuse is that that's not going to happen because that's not how the world works

[@wazman77show]

Good to see you back and commenting on interesting legal media. I look forward to listening to "Star wars leads the way" when i have some time.

[@Kalysta]

Thanks Hoeg! It's a shame no one is saying exactly WHAT the patent is they're suing about!

[@IntoxicusFreeman]

Pokemon in a Pokeball is an extension of the fictional "genie in a bottle trope"

[@ahettinger525]

Hey there! Love that you're covering this (even if there's no way I am ever up early enough to watch live!)

[@PXAbstraction]

That thumbnail is just *chef's kiss*!

[@timogul]

One thing I find interesting, the game Genshin Impact added a method of capturing animals by aiming and throwing a "net ball" at them, and this came out over a month before Pokemon Arceus did. Now in Genshin you cannot _fight_ with these animals you captured, you can only place them into your player housing as a decoration, but you do "own" them.

[@MorbidEel]

It also doesn't have a chance to capture(you either hit the target and it is successful or you don't), display that percentage when you hold the capture item while aiming at the target, allow you to use items to increase that chance or items that can restrict the movement of target.

[@timogul]

@@MorbidEel Does Palworld have all of that? That seems very specific.

[@TheMelnTeam]

Robotrek has balls that look like pokeballs (red and white), which capture and throw to deploy robots (some pokemon are also robots). Robotrek released in 1994, before Pokemon. Pokemon released in 1996, which makes patenting that particular mechanic in 2020s, more than 20 years later, extremely suspect. Unless Japan has no requirement that a patent be "new", that one should be dead in the water. Of course, Nintendo says "multiple patents" and we have yet to be informed what specifically is at issue. Pokeballs should be dead in the water, but who knows what else Nintendo is trying.

[@Deebus]

@@TheMelnTeamthat’s not what the patent is for. You’re misunderstanding it

[@danielmalinen6337]

And in Temtem, after the player has weakened the wild Temtem with their chosen starting Temtem, the player targets the weakened Temtem and throws the captured item, which in this case is a TemCard, to recruit the Temtem as a new member of their party. Later in the game, the player can use their caught Temtems to battle against the eight dojos in the archipelago or mount-and-ride some of them to find more wild Temtems or challenge other trainers across the islands.

[@TheTrueDGDgamer]

I'm sorry, I don't understand. In the 1980s, there was a thing called Ghostbusters. Ghostbusters met a ghost in the field. Start a battle with the ghost. Subdue the ghost by trapping it with a trap that had to be thrown in the proximity of the ghost. Based on that proximity, the ghostbuster was likely to capture the ghost and then acquire the ghost. How is this different from a pokeball?

[@AndresColumbus]

the shape...lol

[@Renoistic]

Nintendo haven't even said what exactly they're suing them for. You're freaking out about nothing.

[@SarignCleric]

​@@RenoisticIt's mainly mechanics they patented that PalWorld is using.

[@neonoah3353]

Mainly the mechanics of "a character throwing an object" i dont remember if it mentioned capturing tho.

[@stillbuyvhs]

If I remember Ghostbusters right, they had to push the ghosts towards the trap using rays.

[@Patrick-tw7nr]

Thanks for this was waiting to see your take on this matter

[@HoegLaw]

Hope you enjoyed it!

[@Patrick-tw7nr]

@@HoegLawabsolutely. I wonder since Palworld is such a successful game that can be a franchise similar to Pokemon that it might be worth them working out a deal with Nintendo to license some of those patented mechanics as part of a settlement. I don’t know if Nintendo would want to especially if Palword takes their patented mechanics and make them better and allow a game similar to Pokemon in looks and gameplay being on competing platforms. It will be interesting on how this all plays out

[@BlahBlahBlahBlah69]

Question does it matter that palworld was in development in 2020 and announced in june 2021 on youtube and at a tokyo game show which was before the patent which nintendo patented or filed for it in December 2021. Also does it matter that craftopia which released in 2020 pocketpairs other game has all the same mechanics?

[@kenrulei09]

@@BlahBlahBlahBlah69 again people assuming this is patient they will use Nintendo stated “multiple patients”

[@xana3961]

They're sub patents of an older, parent patent. So they're all treated as if they were a part of the parent patent.

[@JDReC100]

@@xana3961 that is so dumb....

[@BlahBlahBlahBlah69]

​@@xana3961 I know that but because palworld had been announced at a game show and shown on youtube in june 2021 will that help pocketpair because that was before the parent patent which they got or fuled in December 2021

[@themarchhare154]

@BlahBlahBlahBlah69 what the sub patent from the parent patent does is it allows a parent patent to essentially be "updated" to the times. So a bew mechanic or something that's crucial to the games can be clarified and updated as they "may not have been fully realized at creation." A sub patent is backwardsly enforceable from the date of the parent patent. This means Nintendo/Pokemon was created in the 90s but this new patent was filed and created in the last year or two after Palworld was announced but it's still enforceable as if it was filed in the 90s. It's messy to say the least.

[@wolfvermillion1729]

...My head started hurting when it got to reading that part of the patent. I understand it, I think, but ugh.

[@HoegLaw]

I didn’t want to focus on it except to establish that it’s much more technical than commonly understood.

[@kaligath6616]

The thing is with the sheer number of patents that nintendo own could it not be constructed that nintendo have essentially a monopoly over a industry and could utilize patent lawsuits as to prevent anyone from being able to create games for the industry due to nintendo could utilize prosecution as a means to keep competitors out of the industry. Thus would this not be in violation of breaching anti monopoly laws?

[@dojelnotmyrealname4018]

Nintendo is a JP company and would be subject to JP monopoly laws, unfortunately.

[@kaligath6616]

@@dojelnotmyrealname4018 Japan do have anti monopoly laws just look up Regulation of Antimonopoly Act | Japan Fair Trade Commission and from what i have seen they are very strict. Due to apparently youtube does not like links for some reason.

[@toukoenriaze9870]

@@dojelnotmyrealname4018 JP monopoly laws are very strict ... the only downside is they are massively under nintendos yakuza thumbs

[@boredfangerrude8759]

But they sell in countries across the world so they have to be careful not to violate those monopoly laws

[@ryanolionheart1325]

Yep and with their yakuz ties all other countries shouldn't let a single island country make global laws , Japan isn't even a world power , America should bann nindendo sales since we don't work with terrorists. What if America made a pokemon copy and called it pokemon? What could they do start a war? Get nuked again? I don't understand how they make global laws , what multiple countries sue Japan the country for making laws for a terrorist group to monopolies?

[@Masaim6]

I came for great analysis, and wasn't disappointed. Great work as always!

[@HoegLaw]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@justskip4595]

This is exactly what I have been waiting for since the lawsuit was announced. I'll need to listen to when I have time for this, probably when I am cycling to work and back at monday.

[@moosevelt9148]

I think part of the reason why a lot of people feel invested in this story is because Pokémon games feel kind of stale and not innovative, and needs competition to be pushed forward, and moreover has spawned indie devs to create games that invoke the Pokémon vibes with new and funs spins. If Nintendo/Pokémon Company somehow wins a patent case that prevents others from creating these titles, games like Cassette Beasts and Monster Crown, then it would be a blow to these fans/devs who want more out of this general type of game experience. I, and I expect many others, would hope that Nintendo doesn't win on the basis of a broad patent being upheld, especially when there's a mountain of games to look through and say "catching and fighting monsters" isn't a unique idea (if that's the patent in question, hypothetically speaking). But like you mentioned, it's probably gonna be more specific than that, so maybe there's a positive outcome waiting. Thanks again Hoeg :)

[@Jackolantirn]

Thank you for providing informed reporting in spite of the lack of details surrounding the alleged patent violations. I wish we could know what the alleged patent violations were *before* anyone did any reporting, but the current state of online journalism doesn't allowed for this, and I'd rather have someone with some education in law give their best informed opinion, than some random shmuck who doesn't understand law just shill out misinformation, which, let's be honest, most of the online audience is much more susceptible to misinformation.

[@WARLORD626]

It's Patent's world and we're all living in it.

[@Stratelier]

You're not wrong....

[@gligarguy4010]

People still never shut up about the Nemesis System to this day, after all...

[@KPX01]

@@gligarguy4010 well it is a good mechanic, imagine putting patent to character jumping in the 90s. Nothing other than the first game that feature it can be made. Plus is not like Nintendo never use other game's game mechanic, do not think Pokemon are the first game to feature capture able npc as pet.

[@gligarguy4010]

@@KPX01 Having a "pet" isn't specific enough to patent. Patents are VERY specific and narrow.

[@centurionking9490]

​@@gligarguy4010Warframe in a way has it, Warhammer tho has had it long before (Orks to be specific, or just Necromorphs) it was brought into Mordor/ or War.

[@marciusnhasty]

If I'm not mistaken, law in Japan is quite big on preventing court of public opinion driven litigation. Meaning it seems very believable to me that a lot of information isn't publicly available before the court rules on allegations. They do have that thing where one can be guilty for defamation even if your statement was true, as long as you made the statement publicly before the court decided it is true. Japan tends to hold that reporting on exact allegations violates innocent until proven guilty concept. Something like that, not an expert, shooting from distant memory here.

[@tehRedRunner]

I don't know whether that's true, but it'd be a bit rich for the Japanese hostage justice system to prosecute others for undermining the presumption of innocence

[@serpentmaster1323]

I remember watching a video once that described ALL video game companies did this, or used to. Patent absolutely everything that they thought of, but never sued each other on kind of a trust system. And only using the power to sue with those patents when bad-faith attacks were made by outsiders. Whit the example that video gave being a company that actually sued Nintendo over a controll scheme first. You might not be able to sue on vibes, but everyone and their mother feels Pokemon vibes from pal world and there’s absolutely no doubt that a huge amount of press came from the comparison. Perhaps they consider this enough of a bad faith attack to break that pact with a suit that does have weight, in order to protect themselves. The scary part is that that’s only one way to read the situation, *and regardless of if that’s the logic it would still set one of the most dangerous precedents ever.*

[@brspies]

@17:00 or so - the international agreements there regarding rights to priority and such basically mean we can treat a japanese patent application as a "parent" of a US application, to establish a filing date. The US would still have to examine an application, allow it, and issue a patent for there to be patent protection in the US. So that's why they say "no worldwide patents" - the applications and filing dates can be respected across borders, but the actual property right that comes with the patent itself must be established by each jurisdiction independently. Which is where those small differences in case law and other details become so important.

[@HoegLaw]

I didn’t intend to suggest the USPTO was wrong there, just incomplete for purposes of our conversation.

[@Tsuchimursu]

I don't know if you notice in your gradual progress, but you ate back to sounding totally normal! Good work getting better!

[@HoegLaw]

It's very hard to track for me, but I really appreciate the outside perspective!

[@thepoliticalstartrek]

The important part is who used the mechanism first in a game. If they can prove that some one used the capture mechanic first. It invalidates the patent. They were not the first with capture mechanics. Also, there no treaty that enforces patents across borders unlike copyright. So the could make them change it in Japan only.

[@TRENCHESandTREADS]

"Also, there no treaty that enforces patents across borders unlike copyright" It's the exact opposite my guy. Almost every country on Earth (including North Korea) is part of the same over-arching patent agreement treaty and such treaties have been put into use across country lines. There was a case where the Chinese courts upheld an American patent against a Chinese company. That should tell you how serious countries around the world take the patent treaty.

[@ThePaalanBoy]

The patent mentioned was the throwable ball capturing device that captures and brings monsters to your side/team And the flying mount system that can change from riding on ground to fly in the air

[@valeereon9954]

The throwable object capturing device thing, I can see Nintendo getting pissy over. Sure whatever. I still think patents for game mechanics are the worst thing ever in the industry, and shouldn't be a thing. But the fact that they have a patent for a land-to-air mount system is WILD to me. That's such a freaken broad system to claim??? God I hope Palworld wins this. They probably won't because...Nintendo. But still. It'll just set a bad precedent for the gaming industry moving forward

[@ThePaalanBoy]

@@valeereon9954 see, I totally agree, and so to majority of gaming communities, game mechanics should not be patentable or copyrightable. But here's the banger, Nintendo didn't bother to patent any of this before after the announcement of Palworld and as late as May 2024, which is really suspect, like patent troll level suspect. Nintendo had over 20 years, why now? In addition, if Nintendo wins I hope Ubisoft sues them for using climbable synchronization towers that updates your map in the Switch Zelda games, lol

[@puretrack06]

Since this something comes up every time there is a game patent announcement or lawsuit, can you make a video explaining the legality of patenting mechanics. Also how the patent treaty works. Massive misunderstand of IP in indie/hobbyist community and would be great to help to have video or something to point people towards.

[@LordRazer3]

Nintendo isn't just sueing Pocketpair but also Sony because of its partnership. So this isn't going to be as simple as anyone thing's it will be. This is nothing but a joke to intimidate Nintendo's competition and the die hard fans are to narrow sighted to see how BAD that is for them. Competition is GOOD for consumers!

[@ninjafrog6966]

wait they’re suing sony too?

[@_HanaPanda]

@@ninjafrog6966 I can't find anything on them suing Sony as well. but who knows maybe Sony is backing them in this law suit.

[@LordRazer3]

@@_HanaPanda Not directly no but Sony knows the potential that Palworld can bring them so there going to be offering there legal support. There going to insure as little damage can be done to Pocketpair as possible. Giants like Nintendo and Sony don't directly fight because both have money to drag thing's out. Unless real legal reasons are obvious. Pocketpair is just a small studio so there valuable to just being sued to death but again they signed a partnership

[@LordRazer3]

@@ninjafrog6966 Not directly, Pocketpair has a partnership with Sony. It's like trying to sue Nintendo about pokemon you would have to deal with them, plus Gamefreak and Creatures because they have a partnership

[@rueblie2627]

It’s up to Sony whether they would want to back Pocketpair here or not. They’ve invested a fair bit into trying to set up Palworld as a big franchise but they’ll probably examine the lawsuit and decide whether it’s feasible to win or not. Chances are they’ll decide not to get involved because Nintendo will probably win but that’s yet to really be seen.

[@karygreene471]

So, PUBG should sue every other game that copied it?

[@centurionking9490]

@@karygreene471 I'd agree with them suing Fortnight for sure, heck Guitar Hero, Rockband n every other thing they ripped from suing that rat group that will even sue kids over using their dances. Yeet it out of existence

[@rueblie2627]

If they held the patent for what was copied they could but that really depends on Korean if patent law would approve that.

[@RunicRasol]

The creators of PUBG did in fact sue Epic Games for copying their formula, but the lawsuit was dropped suddenly, and unexpectedly. Likely because you cant really patent a game genre.

[@hiddenlineage4296]

I don't see the lawsuit going anywhere. Nintendo filed the patents in August of this year, so 2 months ago. They are also extremely broad.

[@Lovemy1911a1]

@@hiddenlineage4296 Well those are derivative patents that are based off of older patents. Now if the parent patents come after Palworld or other games have already come out with the same mechanics that would be a strong defense.

[@Tazreale]

Two of the patents came out months way after the game Palworld was already released. Two of the other patents came out when the game was early in development and presented. So, in theory, anyone can release a patent after something and then sue the older thing for violating a 'patent.' Ridiculous.

[@ninjafrog6966]

japan has some messed up patent laws, and i don’t even think they’d let that slide

[@RobAryeeArc]

Thanks Hoeg L&R

[@teamofone1219]

It's not just the capture mechanic they are also patenting flying mounts.

[@clinthives]

15:32 ideas for patents. Patent 1. Character moves on an input of the controller. Patent 2. Character camera moves on an input of the controller. Patent 3. Character stayson its place while making natural movements when there is no input of the controller.

[@Stratelier]

My general impression with this (especially after seeing a few videos covering how, for lack of a better term, "pro-Nintendo" the Japanese reaction is trending) is this: it seems *IDENTICAL* to the strategy large companies employ against derivative fan projects. The owner HAS a legal right to sue any/everyone who infringes, but they only _actually_ threaten/target a few big fish here and there, and let the chilling effect do the rest. After all, most amateur fanart/fanfiction is inherently non-licensed and thus exists at the IP holders discretion to _not_ sue for infringement ... also compare how the US government doesn't "approve" large corporate mergers so much as they just require a minimum time period to potentially _object_ to one (either of which has been referenced in prior VL episodes). ...personally, I still think Nintendo _shouldn't_ have the right to sue a company for "doing what Nintendon't", but I don't disagree that there _is_ a lot in Palworld that looks or feels derivative, and it's only the total combination of its elements that makes it unique.

[@garf02]

A LOT of games DO what Nintendon't but without blatantly ripping off Pokemons. Thats probably the tipping point that got nintendo going. 90% if Palworld played 1:1 but Pal were straight up Digimon copies, Nintendo/ Pokemon would not give a Flying F

[@toukoenriaze9870]

@@garf02 to be fair they tried to sue digimon a long time ago and failed so maybe they have a chance to fail again kek

[@garf02]

@@toukoenriaze9870 I want a single article or new mentioning this Lawsuit if you may, please

[@thegrayinthefield8764]

The japanese reaction to the suit is so inorganic that if people started calling them bots, I wouldn't disagree. It screams Notnilc.

[@japexican007]

Demon souls>>>Dark souls>>> Elden Ring >>> Ghost of Tsushima>>>Black Myth Wukong etc… If Nintendo owned the souls like game patent none of this games would’ve ever been made

[@tPianist03]

Hoeg law the 🐐🐐🐐

[@HoegLaw]

Awww, thanks!

[@imatiu]

Funny detail about "The Omnibus Patent", that was a reactionary patent. A little known fact about the whole debacle with Sony and the Nintendo Disk Drive add on to the N64, was that the reason Nintendo walked back on the deal was because Sony was trying to have a contract that would give them exclusive publishing rights on any software published for the Nintendo Disk Drive, which would mean that Nintendo would basically be dependent on Sony's permision to make and publish any game, yeah that bad, they also patented the usage of a disk drive on a console and that is probably part of the reason why Nintendo went with the propietary disk format on the Gamecube which was smaller than regular CDs. Edit. A small correction, I think this was the case, thinking about it in more detail, the timings kind of fit but I am not completely sure if they do. For all I know the patents in question could have been filed before the fallout with Sony.

[@byronclark7652]

I tried listening, but I kept counting boxes of Unmatched in the background.

[@mistydolphin2524]

Not helping their case, Nexomon and Coromon have identical catching mechanics. Coromon even has a built in toggleable Nuzlocke mode, which the pokemon fandom is well known for. Yet Nintendo never went after either of them.

[@Socioromanticism]

@@mistydolphin2524 I can't speak to Nexomon, but I bought and played Coromon. Coromon's catching mechanic isn't in a 3D space and isn't based on targeting a creature in that space. It's similar to Pokémon prior to Pokémon Legends: Arceus. But earlier Pokémon catching mechanics are not what the patent is about. Craftopia doesn't include the latter part of releasing that creature from the apparatus you caught the creature in to battle for you. Palworld seems to hit on all of those points in the 3D action space for catching monsters and using those monsters to fight in the same way. The question seems to be is if the patent should be valid in the first place or if that's _one_ of the patents Nintendo is suing for (because Nintendo is suing for multiple infringements and this may not even be one of them.)

[@SerpC]

Great video! Nice to see you again.

[@HoegLaw]

Hey, thanks!

[@lordwhite0]

Depresso, when he gets in the hot spring, is hilarious. Noticed yesterday that he's named Depresso 'cause he looks depressed and his partner skill is drinking espresso 😂

[@zZaxOo]

I wonder if the patent is about egg hatching monsters with certain items or pokemon evolution in general. so many things it could be

[@danielmalinen6337]

The evolution mechanism can at least be ruled out on the basis that Palword creatures cannot evolve, unlike in Pokemon and other monster catching games.

[@delta5287]

@@zZaxOo egg hatching for any creature cannot be patented, it's too broad.

[@ninjafrog6966]

palworld doesn’t have evolution

[@CarynelM]

I have 2 monitors for work and it is super helpful for laying things out instead of rummaging through tabs on one explorer window.

[@Raxyz_0]

Hard to see this as anything other than Nintendo using the legal system as a sledgehammer as they usually do. This is one side of the company I absolutely despite. Everyone gleefully recounts how they saved the gaming industry, no one ever remembers the many times they tried to monopolize it and exert their power to prevent competition. The saddest part is that I don't see this status quo changing anytime soon. They just get to throw their weight around and everyone just shrugs.

[@MystearicaClaws]

[Insert angry fist shaking at the sky] youtube!!!!! You didn't alert me to hangouts and headlines!!!! How dare!!!!!

[@DavidLopez-ln2ch]

The entire gameing industry are going to watching what may as well be the biggest legal battle in gaming history.

[@Mr_Tea_Rexx]

one thing that interests me is the fact Pokemon uses a lot of the dragon quest/warriors/monsters mechanics and other games from before it and were even called out using the assassins creed tower map discovery mechanic for the Zelda switch game. So how is Nintendo going to agru this in the court ? aren't themselves also braking patent infringement towards other companies

[@TheFinalChapters]

36:05 No, that's absurd. Pokemon has been throwing balls in 3D space to catch Pokemon ever since the anime came out 27 years ago. There's no way you can patent the obvious method of doing that in a game.

[@TheMelnTeam]

You *shouldn't* be able to do so. But this is going on in Japan, where people can be penalized for defamation even if the defamatory information is true. I don't think Nintendo has a slam dunk case, hell I don't even know which patents are allegedly at issue. But there's good reason to not trust Japanese courts (or even US courts, though they're less bad on these particular issues).

[@Deebus]

You’re lying about the patent entirely here. Weird behaviour

[@lyoko348]

​@@TheMelnTeam from other comments on other videos, supposedly, the patents involve mounts, aiming and throwing something to interact with an entity, and a sound of a successful creature capture. Those might need to be verified since i could be wrong here, but that's what i keep seeing be mentioned on here.

[@WeinerTouchy]

​@@Deebusyou're going to every comment trying to start arguments. Weird behavior.

[@Deebus]

@@WeinerTouchy 2 or 3 comments isn’t every comment. Why you obsessed with me? Do I make you angry? Maybe touch your wiener less, whack ahh username. That’s as weird as it gets lmaoooo

[@angryuncleangus3154]

The Fact is Nintendo is doing this because they're scared that their hold on the creature capture game style can actually be broken. Palworld's insane rise is proof that an open world Pokemon like game is heavily desired. They have just been coasting on their brand name to make sales cause their last Pokemon releases were not good and limited by the hardware they were built for. The annoying thing is the game mechanics they are making patents for is BS because they are not original by concept. They were displayed in many ways through in other mediums. Making a patent on a game mechanic you make that the design and concept was taken from something else seems scummy and shouldn't be allowed.

[@Arbaaltheundefeated]

Well, they've already broken it for me. I'm not ever getting another pokemon game. Or Nintendo for that matter, they're on my (admittedly short) boycot list. And it shouldn't matter how "original" it is in my opinion, you should not be able to patent 'concepts', period. This system of "Others shouldn't be allowed to make games that even play similarly to ours" thing is pure poison for gaming, for the benefit of the big companies' bottom line only.

[@GodwynDi]

If law is enforced properly, it is not allowed. Patents cannot be used for something already in use by someone else. You can't even patent your own things if it's been in public use for some time before filing the patent. I'm sure the courts will be entirely fair and unbiased.

[@Arbaaltheundefeated]

@@GodwynDi I'm not.

[@TRENCHESandTREADS]

@@GodwynDi "You can't even patent your own things if it's been in public use for some time before filing the patent." This is what gets me, the time for Nintendo to file these patents was like 20+ years ago when Pokemon first came out, not now when it's been in the public conscious for so long *and* would have run out of patent protection if it was filed at the appropriate time.

[@LeSqueed]

I am curious. Could Nintendo want to be more willing to settle, maybe for less than they initially would want if it looks like Pocket Pair wants to go all the way in challenging the patents? Whatever the patents turn out to be. I imagine the worst case scenario for Nintendo would be to have their patents deemed invalid. Depending on the patents involved this could be just a minor inconvenience or open the door to more games using some core systems to their game. And even if Pocket Pair loses they could still decide to implement a change to no longer infringe on said patent I imagine.

[@valeereon9954]

I feel like it's going to depend on if other big companies like Sony are going to back Pocket Pair or not. Because Pocket Pair does NOT have the funds to get into a proper legal battle with Nintendo and Game Freak - they'll just get bled dry. I'm not knowledgeable enough to know if Pocket Pair can just tweek some stuff/designs in-game enough to skirt the patents or not (i.e. change the spheres/catching animation or whatever) or if they'll still owe Nintendo fees or anything. Really interested to see how this all plays out. Either way, this is not going to end with good PR for Nintendo imo

[@danielmalinen6337]

What do you think about the current recommendation that game studios and developers should check which patents Nintendo owns, and then either ask for written licenses to use the game mechanics and features that Nintendo owns the patents for, or completely avoid using them in their video games and develop something new and creative in their place to replace them?

[@BillyAoki]

Japan copyright laws don’t cover designs of fictional characters, that’s why Nintendo couldn’t sue over that. It’s also the same reason why cosplay porn is rampant in Japan but not a single one of them got sued…to my knowledge

[@One-ct3xe]

I think it has a lot to do with sticking it to another games company during a low point where they’ve chosen to spend a great deal of money on a derivative franchise.

[@iggyboo]

Even if it is a petent issue for pokemon style gameplay wouldn't those have already expired years ago. I mean technically Ark is a legitimate target too.

[@BlackHand531]

Looking forward to this

[@minotaur21ri33]

Question: Could the Patent lawsuit be used as a predicate by Nintendo to get to a discovery phase to see how the Pals were designed to see if they used Nintendo's designs as a base for the Pals and then bring a Copyright lawsuit against PocketPair after the discovery phase if they find out they used pokemon designs as a base for some of their designs?

[@m.conner3037]

If Nintendo is claiming the patent of capturing creatures/monsters of any sort they would need to go after every other game out there that involves the same mechanics.

[@JacobyMc]

Are we getting more Lawyers and Dragons? Can Tie Guy Travis join?

[@MatildatheMoonwolf]

Kinda unrelated since it’s not about patents, but there’s a twitter thread from a former designer of Pocket Pair that allegedly says the CEO would intentionally ask them to make the pals to rank like popular Pokemon, then changed designs after said designer refused to copy anyone and left the company. Again, the only source comes from one twitter thread that’s in Japanese and this lawsuit is about patents and not about character design so only take this as a red flag and nothing more, even if it’s a big one. Twitter user Lewtwo screenshotted that twitter thread for anyone who’s curious.

[@tylerbarse2866]

It's not kind of, It is UNRELATED. This is a patent suit, not a copyright suit. FFS, the article Hoeg cited the patent points out how according to the one Lawyer, Nintendo explicitly changed it's patents in order to sue for palworld because their designs were unique enough to stand alone and not be infringing. This is just classic Nintendo, rather than spend their time and effort improving their games, they'd rather just sue their competition out of the race. Blue ocean strategy at best, we can't have no competition, because we'll patent game mechanics and lock down entire genres of games.

[@samtime2711]

​@tylerbarse2866 Now I most ask , if they changed their patent with even a hint of premeditated intent to sue, does that work against them in long terms, the reason I ask is because it may have standing in Japan's courts, but at least in the US, it may be see that Nintendo trying to unfairly update there patent in order to trap someone in law and patent office will not grant update of there patent or may just throw the patent out.

[@thegrayinthefield8764]

Even so, I wouldn't trust Japanese twitter as far as I could throw it. They really got an axe to grind.

[@ninjafrog6966]

it’s not kinda unrelated, it is unrelated, and besides, it’s an extremely sketchy thread and a huge red flag. i don’t think they’re actually associated with Pocketpair at all

[@ninjafrog6966]

@@tylerbarse2866regardless of what people believe, competition is good, not bad

[@iankester-haney3315]

Could the TV series or Original description in the Trading Card Game count as Prior Art? Certainly the game has to capture the same elements as the original work.

[@CarynelM]

Is it possible for Nintendo and Palworld to duke it out under seal and for us to never find out what the patent was?

[@Zeoinx69]

@HoegLaw Got a quick question, what if Pocket Pair, just decided to abandon the Japanese Market, and pull there game out of japan. Would that force the lawsuit to be dropped in japan, thus allowing Nintendo of America to then either bring a new lawsuit using US trademark law, or drop the lawsuit, thus denying Nintendo "home field advantage" in terms of law.

[@pragmaticeagle4832]

Nintendo, Nintendo, Nintendo... I don't like Nintendo. Used to, but I haven't for almost a decade. Protect your property, sure. But picking on indie teams/games because you're a juggernaut that makes minimal effort to gives fans what they want (speaking about pokemon specifically) seems like a bad move to me. Even if we find out Pocketpair is in the wrong, I don't think this is a good look for Nintendo. They (& the Pokemon company) should be working with companies (imo) to improve upon the monster catching genre of games. Gamers eem to love this, so do better, or help others do better.

[@multieyedmyr]

@@pragmaticeagle4832 it won’t matter. They don’t care. Kids will still eat up any ol garbage 5hey set in front of them with Pokémon on it. And older generations will still eat up any old link/Mario nostalgia bait they crap out into the world.

[@rueblie2627]

Pocketpair is only in danger here if they actually did something wrong. Which implies they did something wrong because Nintendo wouldn’t be trying otherwise. New and innovative games should be encouraged but Palworld is neither of those, it’s mostly a reskin of a game they already made which was itself a pretty cheaply made copy of Ark: Survival Evolved. I struggle to find sympathy for them here.

[@Epicgaming1990]

So based apon what your saying a fishing net would qualify for the capturing pattent to be thrown out

[@greyman6662]

You think this will influence companies in the usa to do the same to other indie companies if nintendo wins. Like gathering up all patents. Like how investors keeps buying up houses here?

[@delta5287]

No, there are safeguards in place to stop that. Also you can't patent something if it's too broad.

[@greyman6662]

@@delta5287 especially in the united states?

[@teamchaos5101]

​@@greyman6662especially in the United States

[@greyman6662]

Ok you guys are the experts

[@月見かしゆき]

Pocketpair's first use case of what Pokémon company patented was before the patients existence so Pokémon company isn't the only one who has used it before the patient had existed

[@gligarguy4010]

The only thing I have to say about this is social media has truly been embarrassing over all of this. Weirdly enough you're seeing western people all cheer on Pocketpair and Japanese people all cheer on Pokemon like this is some sort of sporting event where everyone just cheers for the home team. One thing is for sure - regardless of who wins, we all lose. The PS5 version not releasing in Japan was noticeable.

[@Idkwhatever113]

You are way too underrated.

[@HoegLaw]

Nice of you to say. Thank you.

[@evilshews]

Wonder, when apple suid microsoft over the GUI mechanix, the lawsuit was found to be without merit because both apple and microsoft got the idea from a paperless office application xerox was developing. Might be nimtendo has a tougher job, if palworld can piont out every other toss and capture game mechanic.

[@ImprovmanZero]

Given rhe fact that Nintendo never loses when they file in Japan I don't think they have a chance

[@thunderdragon8341]

everyone thinks it has to do with the way pals are captured and stored and summoned into battle

[@99lad]

wait I remember a Skyrim mod of pokemon that you throw a ball in the field they are copie a mod

[@Etnaese]

Thanks for your input! Mixed on who to side with. PalWorld flew too close to the sun too much while also Nintendo is going about it a bit too far, IMO.

[@boredfangerrude8759]

Capture subs? You just violated Nintendo's patent! I cant wait for that video! 🤪😂

[@joser51o]

This is not a pal world killer it is a video game killer! Nintendo has crossed the line for the last time for me. I'm a gamer before a fan boy and what Nintendo is doing is diabolical. They're literally going to affect the whole industry in a negative way if they win. If it wasn't bad enough that they don't believe in the preservation of video games. And they shut down fan games that look better than their own. Now they are trying to keep people from using game mechanics.

[@boredfangerrude8759]

I'd argue most of their Pokémon patterns are too basic for the monster catching genre to be legally enforceable.

[@GMThEMaN]

I would like to share this video (kzbin.info/www/bejne/mZOramCir91ngrssi=N-Xw0kcFQisAdLHo) where it talks about another case of Nintendo vs another japanese game developer, where Nintendo sued such developer over patent infringement and Nintendo won. I think what happened in that case might happen in a similar way to Pocketpair. Would like to see your opinion over the video and maybe new insight about Nintendo vs Pocketpair.

[@ryanpottle6443]

I just bought palworld. I've done my part to help them fight

[@zeroexmachina]

My prediction is that palworld is gonna get some new ammo or guns for capturing

[@moonblastx1996]

Before watching I'm giving my hot take that this will not go to court and they will just settle an agreement, because 1) Nintendo has weak claims at best and can't win but 2) Palworld doesn't wanna invest what it needs to win this So what will happen is Palworld pays off Nintendo to shut up and changes some things in the game and it's over

[@HoegLaw]

You should watch!

[@moonblastx1996]

@@HoegLaw I will tomorrow, right now it's too late for my brain to process hahaha. But I've looked into this a great deal. I was one of the people that critized Palworld heavily for the clearly on the nose designs, yet Nintendo's actions have driven me to support the polar opposite of the argument and defend Palworld because the big N is being petty and ridiculous here and just wants to punish them. That's not what patent laws are for. They're patent trolls and probably shouldn't even own these patents

[@Bobbias]

​​​@@moonblastx1996yeah most of the video game parents I've seen so far should never have been granted due to a lack of novelty, prior art, or obviousness. It's really disappointing to see patents being abused in this way. They were designed to protect the little guy, not fuck them over because a huge company has a crack team of lawyers and effectively infinite cash

[@garf02]

Nintendo might have the Money and Means to just be a Court Bully, BUT they actually do their homework, if they are suing is cause they KNOW they are likely to win litigation.

[@206Zelda]

I am hoping that Palworld survives. Winning may be beyond its scope by the powers that be, but survival isn't impossible. I'm sure there's a myriad of ways folks can tell me how 'it won't' or 'Nintendo will destroy them' or other practical doomsaying, and I'm not interested. I have one simple desire: survival for Palworld. It may not have much compared to what Nintendo holds, but it gave more than the Pokemon Company has given in the past decade or so.

[@punowtoplaygame1945]

Lawsuit Similar things as copying by report they are a dream game similar game that. DMCA Policy is removed but the victim cannot restore but no stealing, but simply flash mail online flakes, fake copyright report. Similar are similar to heart content. no reply copyright takedown. For the heart of a similar thing or replacing pictures of the action of scenery or character. Please Mario Dev Team please do takedown with DMCA into the Palworld.

[@drdca8263]

Uhh? I’m not sure how to interpret your comment.

[@Lapsio]

Hey - legitimate question - is it possible that Pocketpair will owe outrageous amount of money to Nintendo up to point it ends up with bankruptcy? I mean - are fines bound to income earned from product infringing patents (so it can't exceed what they earned), or is it sone arbitrary amount and Nintendo can say they want 357437473325775590 $ as compensation?

[@AdroitConceptions]

did my comment get eaten?

[@earendurvoneinzbern7585]

There have been people saying, Atari should sue Nintendo. I would agree. What do you all think?

[@MiqoteMatsiko]

Temtem was a direct ripoff of Pokemon pre-"open-world". However its popularity died on the vine when it hit 1.0 so no one cares about going after them.

[@Botanist3]

Another fun thing about the US patent bar is it has non-attorney members, such as myself, known as patent agents. I do think that folks have broadly found the patents at issue, not because of the mechanics, but because of the filing dates within the patent families. Take the catching application you mentioned. The parent, filed in 2021, does recite catching mechanics that are essentially those in Arceus as you said and based on the structure of the claims I DO NOT believe they implicate Palworld's gameplay because it required switching between ball/item and pokemon throwing modes based on player input as the sole independent claim in each of its three claim sets. Because Palworld doesn't implement player input to switch between throwing a ball to catch and throwing a ball to release a pal to fight or do another action they cannot infringe. The potential infringement comes in the continuations (IDK what these are called for sure in Japan, but in the US they are called continuations) filed after Palworld released, but claiming priority to the 2021 application. These are derivative applications based on the parent which usually claims what amounts to variations on the parent application. Importantly in the US and from what I can see in Japan as well these applications have the effect as if they were filed when the parent application was filed, in this case 2021. Which importantly makes them enforceable against Palworld. It is these later filed applications that read DIRECTLY on Palworld's gameplay and IMO are a really underhanded, though potentially legal, way for Nintendo to ambush Pocketpair. This is all still technically speculation, but the content of the patent claims along with the filing pattern are just too coincidental for that patent family to not at least be part of the IP at issue in the lawsuit

[@BlahBlahBlahBlah69]

Does it matter that palworld was announced in june 2021 at a Tokyo game show while the patent for those mechanics were filed in December 2021. And does it help that pocketpair had a game they released in 2020 that had the same mechanics in it and they brought them over to palworld.

[@Botanist3]

​@@BlahBlahBlahBlah69 in the US it probably would depending on specifics. In Japan I can only guess. It's all going to depend on the specifics of IP law in Japan and like Hoeg mentioned, though the broad strokes are close enough for folks with training in IP to speak meaningfully on the subject the nitty gritty of what will and won't weigh in at court is something a Japanese Patent Practitioner/lawyer would need to weigh in on

[@HoegLaw]

Thank you for the well considered comment. Your analysis all seems broadly consistent with what I’ve seen.

[@Botanist3]

@@HoegLaw I'm just very curious to see how this plays out. If this were in the US I'd say Pocketpair have a very good argument that the continuations are unenforceable due to the doctrine of prosecution laches or are invalid due to any number of 103/obviousness grounds I can think of pulling from games like Ark and its ilk. But I really hope the complaint becomes public at some point and a Japanese practitioner can weigh in fully because I really want to know how these things are handled in Japan cuz differences in how different countries handle patent matters is fascinating. Also... Just an FYI you and EDB are part of the reason I took a leap and took the patent bar. You both inspired me and I'm glad to see you recovering even more

[@toukoenriaze9870]

abusing patent law because you failed to sue them under copywrite is sooo dumb

[@AndresColumbus]

I hope there's a class action filed against Nintendon't for their BS patents in the USA simply because of the precedent this would set if they are somehow successful. As far as Japan goes...who cares? But we have to stop the Patent office for allowing game mechanics that aren't tied to proprietary hardware (sold WITH a technology ie Occulus) to be patented in the first place. Separate and/or specific game rules & mechanics aren't inventions unless there is something physically tangible (a football or a controller or console) that its tied to. Also, shapes and the act of hunting cannot be patented which is what this is no doubt, what Nintendon't patened (the ball to be used as a net).

[@japexican007]

Demon souls>>>Dark souls>>> Elden Ring >>> Ghost of Tsushima>>>Black Myth Wukong etc… If Nintendo owned the souls like game patent none of this games would’ve ever been made

[@ijustsawthat]

Step 1: Patent a game that makes other games Step 2: Sue all gane engines in the world How that could ever make sense?

[@SealFormulaMaster]

I want to know exactly what patent Nintendo is accusing PocketPair of infringing on. From my understanding, patents only last 20 years or so, meaning only a patent from 2005 should be enforceable. Unless patents in JP can be renewed, any patents for catching a creature, how many shakes the device does for indication, how weak a creature has to be, and so on should've expired since Pokemon was released in 1996, and any updated patents would likely be invalid since plenty of other 3D games with capturing mechanics came out before 2022. And there's enough games with similar mechanics that games before 2005, such as riding a creature like in Barbie's Horse Adventure or hang gliding in Amped 3, that any patents Nintendo DOES have can easily be challenged by PocketPair and potentially by other studios like Indie Built or Blitz Games in an American court. Hopefully we learn what patent is being discussed soon so we can make better judgement on whose right and wrong. If this does go to court, hopefully Sony backs PocketPair. Nintendo has been... On their high horse for awhile.

[@Stratelier]

So far I've heard that patents can sometimes can be divided into a hierarchy of "parent" and "child" patents, extending the functional length during which the owner can sue for infringement. For example, if you have a timeline of: A - parent patent issued B - competing work released C - child patent issued D - lawsuit claiming B infringes on C Then despite B predating C, due to the parent-child relationship between A and C, the infringement claim is weighed with _B relative to A._

[@allenrichardson9084]

This is just Word P for trolls that get paid way to much.

[@valgrimgaming6769]

But the biggest problem is that this game has already been in development they started this patent and 2021 how is that not consider malicious intent to cause harm to another company or business the game has already been in development. You need to get a license before you can even start making the video game. They released in 2021 which means this game has already been in development. You can’t just stick something on them during development. On top of the fact, there are multiple games that use that type of mechanic like baseball or football or Ghostbusters. And what about anime how many animes are exactly the same when it comes to the character design powers storyline what about playing cards like the description of them HP MP their abilities what if Yu-Gi-Oh! or magic the gathering sued Pokémon. What about breath of the wild how Pokémon stole assets to make their game? There are multiple games that have that have taming Like ark evolved or better yet what about dragon Ball z cap corp has a design where they press a button, and an object comes out of it you press it again and it sucks it back in. Pokémon balls do the same function so I think the people who make the anime of dragon Ball Z should sue Nintendo. There are multiple mechanics and anime that could be argued to sue Nintendo because they have mechanics where they are throwing objects. Everybody who doesn’t live in Japan just needs to boycott the entire country. Nintendo and Pokémon to these people who have been clearly taken profit from outside their country so if you’re gonna take profit outside your country and try to use these patent you should have to pay everybody back outside your country because you were taking money from us

[@dreamsoffury8369]

Seeint a handful of patents they have such as one thats about "enjoyable games" they are probably just shotgunning a bunch of patents at pocket pair to win one that will give them precedent to go after any and all game companies

[@MrJamess1982]

Pokémon means Pocket Monsters, so calling them Monsters or “Mons” is not that weird

[@Draugul]

I wonder. If they were going with the vibe of the media at start, and just called their game "Pokemon with guns" And put a big disclaimer on it, that their game is a parody of the world of Pokemon. Would that have changed anything? As I believe parody is just a form of satire, and satire is kind of protected in law? And even as the name Pokemon was a no go, they could also just used the full name were Pokemon came from. Just call it POcKEt MONsters with guns... I probable are thinking to creative now. But that is a bit the problem I have with this. It feels like big corporations are taking away my freedom as creator. Because it feels like they can use their money to win almost every legal battle. And I cant shake the feeling, that Justitia is not supposed to work that way. You get then the Parody of Justitia peeking from under her blindfold at the dollars offered to her...

[@Draugul]

Okay that was a lot of feelings. 😝 If it made someone feel a bit down. Look up the video with the name " How This Duck Outsmarted Disney's Lawyers " It, shows that even the big mouse himself not always wins. 😁

[@toukoenriaze9870]

they never called it pokemon with guns tho? that was a meme started by the players

[@lucindas723]

Replay crew!! 🖤 🎮🖤🎮

[@colorless_crown3789]

Nintendo is disney for japan at this point

[@WooShell]

I wouldn't be surprised if, starting with the next update, we'd be throwing a cube or a net to catch our pals..

[@Aarkwrite]

I was thinking a net/energy field (for bigger pals) would be nice. Like the net/field generator could be stuffed into fairly chonky cartridges, which still lets them make distinct tiers of catchers like the current spheres. But instead of throwing the catchers we’d have shooters like the grappling guns already in game. So on top of non thrown cartridges having ballistic properties, different tiers of launchers could also affect trajectory and accuracy. I wonder if all that would be enough to distance the catching mechanics from whatever patents Nintendo is intending to wield against PocketPair (assuming of course, throwing balls is one of the patents)

[@garybarber6647]

can someone sum it up for me

[@jungsa4691]

Hate the fact that the gaming community tries so hard to gaslight people by saying palworlds is not like Pokémon... no.. it's just the art, gameplay that shows a lot of similarities, even so far to describe it as Pokémon with guns. At what point did you all consider it not to be pokemon??