Palworld vs Pokémon lawsuit possible issues legally for ff14

[PrinceBrightstar]

Most people forget about Craftopia that Pocket Pair also put out which came out before Nintendo filed for certain patents. Prior art.

Prior art exists before anything Nintendo put out for mounts. Look to Ultima 1.

[Kemiko]

that is what I have heard as well (this being one of the patents in question), then yes, they were created after Palworlds release, which should become invalid given the facts. IANAL though.

Unfortunately, from my understanding of patents is that a patent owner can sue for infringement if someone uses their patented invention without permission, even if that patent was created after the product was finished. I.E. Nintendo making the patent after Palworld was released is still, for some reason, legal and applicable. I think it's only not applicable if the patent is still pending.

A defense case for it to be invalid is for patent language to not be precise enough (I.E., if it's too broad in its wording) or if the patented technology existed before the patentee's filing (which when it comes to software is a can of worms).

[CaptainLagbeard]

From what I understandf, Japan's legal system for patents works in a way that they're granted to whoever patents something first rather than whoever makes the thing first... So from that point, Nintendo's absolute bullshit patent would be valid despite these things having existed for many many years prior...

But it's going to have to be seen if any court in Japan would allow for such a broad concept to be patented.

[Larirawiel]

So one of the patents that Nintendo made so they could sue palworld was basically the system to select a mount from a menu that the player can ride on the ground and then could transfer to flying in the air or land from the air. Which largely speaking is basically the same as mount system in pretty much any video game 60% of the function if there’s no flying which begs the question could we be losing our mount system should Nintendo win to avoid lawsuits until they rework it to avoid a lawsuit?

A patent will become invalid if something exists before the patent was filed. It is called "prior art". And the patent, which Nintendo uses against Palworld could also become invalid because of that. There is a game named "Craftopia", which has very similar mechanics to the Nintento patent.


Cheers

[Kranel_San]

Unfortunately, it appears we've entered the dark age of gaming patents and legal profit, where gaming companies race with each other to register their patents. The profit they've made from selling games and innovation no longer stands as a pillar to profitability, but rather suing others for legal profit in place of sales.

I hope some legal changes and regulations happen to prevent this farce from getting worse.

[Alice_Rivers]

I hope for the sake of sanity that Palworld wins this but really all patents should have limited exclusivity, I understand keeping them as an "I invented this thing/way of doing things and you can't claim it" after the exclusivity period which I would set at five to ten years, but beyond a limited lifespan exclusivity serves only to hold back technological development.

As for Nintendo being made to seem like the bad guy by a shady company, maybe Nintendo should stop competing with EA to be the most hated company on Earth, given how generic the patents in question are the most just outcome is for the whole case to be laughed out of court.

[NegativeS]

Nintendo only cares when you try to enter their exclusive bubble of 'casual/family games'.

If you're outside of the bubble, you pretty much have nothing to fear. WoW has had fake Pokemon for over a decade and as far as I know never got any problems.

Stick your finger in the bubble, though, like so many fan game devs have been known to do, and you're very likely getting it bitten off.

Pocket Pair thought they could hide from the beast inside the bubble. They're probably going to be eaten alive.

[MisterNublet]

Nintendo only attack people that try to f*ck with them

Nah, other way around. Nintendo f*cks with smaller game developers to scare them away from creating games that might possibly show creativity or advancements in the gaming industry by using such vague-arse patents to sue with. Smaller developers don't have the funds to defend themselves against a giant multi-billion dollar company, and will have to cave-in on the lawsuit.

Why allow competition to exist that will force you to develop better games when you can rehash the same game over and over again to make money?

[Fatch38]

If you're outside of the bubble, you pretty much have nothing to fear. WoW has had fake Pokemon for over a decade and as far as I know never got any problems.

probably the most simple answer : blizzard being a US company so not the same law are applied and blizzard being blizzard (so having quite the staff of lawyer etc)

[Loggos]

I don't know much about copyright practices in the gaming industry so this may be a silly question but how can Nintendo have such a monopoly on the "collect and train creatures for battle" idea which to me feels more like a general/broader gameplay concept?

Imo that's as if someone were to copyright rpgs (leveling your character, having stats, different abilities, skill trees, armour), turn-based (FF-style) rpgs in particular, tekken-esque fighting games etc. ... And then there is the whole genre of soulslike with the distinct purpose of recreating the key elements of FromSoftware games with their own spin.
Also didn't Genshin Impact heavily reference certain Legend of Zelda BoTW features but never got into any trouble (which I think is good) despite Zelda being Nintendo?

That's probably my ignorance talking but "collect and train creatures for battle" seems about as general as the other things I listed so why can there be soulslike and mario and zelda clones but creature collectors are somehow a problem...
Screw Nintendo for that.