Palworld developer Pocketpair has revealed details of Nintendo and The Pokémon Company's lawsuit which alleges that the game infringes on multiple patents.
Software patents are fucked, ain’t they? You can implement a thing using completely different code, algorithms, hell even programming languages/CPU architectures, and you’d still be infringing. There was some stupid fight over a simple slider UI element to unlock a phone a few years back.
Code is already copyrighted by default, so no need for software patents. Luckily software patents are null and void in EU, so I don’t have to worry about that.
The solutions here don’t seem to really be solutions in my opinion, especially the third one. It’s like if the problem a patent solves was “being able to individually package sandwiches on a conveyor belt” and the solution was “have a machine that recognizes where one sandwich ends and another begins so it can stop and start packaging appropriately.” Like, no kidding, but how?
So the first two seem to deal with throwing a capture item at a creature (wild pokemon) and/or releasing a character’s own creature to fight it (essentially first seen in Legends Arceus, tossing a ball at a pokemon to aggro it and then fighting it with your pokemon). The third one is, as others have said, Mount transitions (at least in pokemon, also first seen in Legends Arceus if you only count ride pokemon; if vehicles are included I believe the first would be Sword/Shield). Though if vehicles are included Nintendo would have a hard time fighting that one. Vehicle transformation, especially in racing games, has been around forever.
These look like they are after Palworld was released. Was Nintendo just sitting on the patent since Pokeman red/blue? What an unintuitive legal system they have over in Japan.
Looking through the first one’s content and it seems reasonable? The patent’s abstract is supposed to be as widely applicable as legally permitted, so it’s like a completely different language on top of legalese.
For reference, the allegedly infringing patents are these:
How do these not apply to the majority of games, these sound so insanely broad. Patents are so stupid.
Sony has a patent for an input device having two data streams at once
usb has more i think.
They only apply to games from Japan. This is the Japanese patent system.
But why in english if it’s (seemingly) domestic only.
Are they mandated to submit in English?
The posted text could be translation. Kinda reads like it.
How many Japanese games are there? Nintendo better pick up the pace.
Holy hell.
Even by the standard of “all software patents are nonsense”, these are a fucking joke.
It basically hits any game with mounts or vehicles.
Hold my bacon, one can patent the idea that a game character switches mounts depending on a given state? (Image 3)
Seems like it. So when you come down from the sky on your flying mount and get close to the ground, you swap to a horse mount for example.
How can one patent this… wtf!
Software patents are fucked, ain’t they? You can implement a thing using completely different code, algorithms, hell even programming languages/CPU architectures, and you’d still be infringing. There was some stupid fight over a simple slider UI element to unlock a phone a few years back.
Yeah software patents should be like “this exact code” or something along these lines. I mean patenting “hello world” should give you billions
Code is already copyrighted by default, so no need for software patents. Luckily software patents are null and void in EU, so I don’t have to worry about that.
The solutions here don’t seem to really be solutions in my opinion, especially the third one. It’s like if the problem a patent solves was “being able to individually package sandwiches on a conveyor belt” and the solution was “have a machine that recognizes where one sandwich ends and another begins so it can stop and start packaging appropriately.” Like, no kidding, but how?
So the first two seem to deal with throwing a capture item at a creature (wild pokemon) and/or releasing a character’s own creature to fight it (essentially first seen in Legends Arceus, tossing a ball at a pokemon to aggro it and then fighting it with your pokemon). The third one is, as others have said, Mount transitions (at least in pokemon, also first seen in Legends Arceus if you only count ride pokemon; if vehicles are included I believe the first would be Sword/Shield). Though if vehicles are included Nintendo would have a hard time fighting that one. Vehicle transformation, especially in racing games, has been around forever.
Why are there dates in the corners?
These are the patent publication dates, for more details you can check https://patentscope.wipo.int/ with patents 7545191, 7493117 and 7528390
These look like they are after Palworld was released. Was Nintendo just sitting on the patent since Pokeman red/blue? What an unintuitive legal system they have over in Japan.
How can you infringe on a patent that doesn’t exist when you’re writing the code?hopefully Palworld can afford the lawyers to kill this off now.
If these were stories I was picking up to implement I would be asking the BA to elaborate some more 😂
Looking through the first one’s content and it seems reasonable? The patent’s abstract is supposed to be as widely applicable as legally permitted, so it’s like a completely different language on top of legalese.