Palworld vs Pokémon lawsuit possible issues legally for ff14

[ryutakayama]

So I know it sounds wierd and all but getting into the details I’m sure it make more sense.

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?

[Carin-Eri]

The legal complexities at play here are a real headache. Whilst I have no idea for sure (this is a Japanese patent lawsuit between two Japanese companies), I would assume that in order for Nintendo to challenge Patent infringement the mount system within a game would need to either be functionally the same as/very similar to, or borrow elements from, Nintendo's system for Nintendo to have a case.
But again - I'm only assuming.

Although I will say that IF a sense of paranoia did spread it would impact far more than just FFXIV.

[BabyYoda]

next time nintendo should patten games so they can have full control

[Iscah]

If Pokémon could lay claim over such a generic concept, then Final Fantasy can probably go after them for using potions to restore HP and ethers to restore MP-equivalent.

[Enkidoh]

These kinds of lawsuits happen all the time in gaming - gaming companies and developers sue each other for one using another's ideas, mechanics or technology, and really, this is probably going to be like the others - each company's legal team settles out of court by paying damages and then royalities.

This whole thing is about money not whether a game used a certain mechanic that a certain company 'created' or not, especially a mechanic that has been used for years by various developers without issue.

[CNitsah]

Nintendo only attack people that try to f*ck with them, so SE has nothing to fear. Most of the industry use some of their patent for free (the D-pad is patented by Nintendo, yet everyone use it for free), as much in term of hardware than software. Their mentality is that it's something the industry need. But when someone tries to f*ck with them, they use them as dissuasion method.

People like to paint this situation as Nintendo fearing for their licence and thus trying to kill the game that did what people want pokemon to be, but palworld looks more like Ark : Survival Evolve than Pokemon, and Pocket Pair (the studio behind palworld) is known to be a company with an history of shady marketting plans, games being sold in alpha/beta and never getting an official release, etc.

If I had to guess, I would rather think Nintendo found some of their assets in the game, and they want to kill the fact Pocket Pair use a narrative that paint them as the bad guy of the story. Last Pokemon showed them they can release basically the same game again and again, and release it bugged as hell and still be the best sold pokemon game ever... Nintendo probably don't care about Palworld, Nintendo don't like being painted like the bad guy by a shady company that use that narrative as a commercial argument.

[Bellsong]

Nintendo only cares when it's a passionate fan project, a threat to a new project, or pal world because the devs dared to step up and actually make a good Pokemon game.

[Carin-Eri]

I know one thing - I detest the fact that Nintendo may well have created a new patent after Palworld came out, paid to rush the patent through the approval process, and are now suing Palworld for RETROACTIVELY violating a patent they created for no other reason than to ruin Palworld. Sorry, but if it is true this is scummy as hell.

If it is correct, so far as I am concerned Nintendo should be made to pay Palworld for exploitive misuse of the patent system; it sets a terrible precedent for corporations being able to sue small businesses over retroactively created patents.

[ovIm]

I know one thing - I detest the fact that Nintendo may well have created a new patent after Palworld came out, paid to rush the patent through the approval process, and are now suing Palworld for RETROACTIVELY violating a patent they created for no other reason than to ruin Palworld. Sorry, but if it is true this is scummy as hell.

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.

[Jeeqbit]

Making a patent for something that already exists is redundant. Should be easy to get thrown out of court.

A lot of tech companies made patents for things that existed before they existed themselves, such as polls (believe it or not). It's not been a practical issue, because people continue making polls and "violating" their patent, but I don't see how it could possibly hold up when it definitely wasn't their invention.