10 ms·
Nintendo Files Suit for Infringement of Patent Rights Against Pocketpair, Inc
- eterevsky 2y agoDo they have the case though? I thought the game mechanics by themselves were not copyrightable, only specific text/art/etc.
- asp_hornet 2y agoIts patent infringement not copyright infringement.
- DaleNeumann 2y agoNo one saw this comming
- wetpaws 2y agoGentle reminder that Nintendo was never good
- excalibur 2y agoI mean have you met the competition? Microsoft is never NOT in the running for world's most evil corporation, and Sony made Morbius.
- t-writescode 2y agoThe competition against Nintendo is the vast array of indie devs.
- krustyburger 2y agoThey’re also not exactly allies with folks that just want to maintain video game history that they refuse to maintain themselves.
- denkmoon 2y agoAttempting to defend your perceived rights in court isn't evil.
- matheusmoreira 2y agoIntellectual property monopolists should not even exist in the first place, much less have "rights" to "defend" in court, real or perceived. The whole premise is absurd to begin with. I can't believe it got to the point where people are debating the relative morality of monopolists defending their "rights".
- sandwichmonger 2y ago[flagged]
- spookie 2y agoHow is Nintendo a monopolist?
- matheusmoreira 2y agoEvery single owner of intellectual property is a monopolist. The government grants them a monopoly on the information for a number of years. Patents are somewhat tolerable monopolies: they tend to last only a quarter of our lifetimes. Once they expire, the information is freed from their "ownership". Nintendo didn't build their fortunes on patents, though. They built it on copyrights. You and I will likely be long dead before those works enter the public domain. If they ever do.
- Dylan16807 2y agoNintendo's perceptions of their rights are far in excess of reasonable. Attempting to defend that does make them bad.
- yieldcrv 2y agoPokémon company sues Palworld for making the pokemon game everyone always wanted without calling them pokemon Merits of the case? What would the patent rights be, if anyone has looked
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- KevinGlass 2y ago[flagged]
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- Abekkus 2y agoSure, use some Pokémon as placeholders during development, but, No one even bothered to dedicate an employee to preventing those assets from getting shipped?? Gamers already had their fun, too bad for any investors that they didn’t cover their bases
- op00to 2y agoThe developers did not use Pokémon models. This was shown to be untrue.
- ihuman 2y agoThat rumor from when the game launched was debunked
- fooqux 2y agoCopying some textures wouldn't lead to a patent lawsuit.
- anankaie 2y agoUnless it is a design patent, though I have no idea if Japanese law even supports this kind of IP protection.
- nfriedly 2y agoFor those unaware, Pocketpair made the game Palworld, which has "pals" that look like Pokemon.
- yieldcrv 2y agoand capture balls I’m still wondering what the edge for a “patent rights” case is. I’m guessing trademarks and copyright was a nonstarter.
- irjustin 2y agoI didn't know what Pocketpair was and immediate glace made me think they were Pokemon and Nintendo was suing because Pocketpair+Nintendo were in a partnership/official-license and something had broken down in the relationship. Nope! Clearly mimicking Pokemon and even all the headlines are "Pokemon with guns". Is it okay? No idea, this seems extremely muddy.
- ehnto 2y agoI think the games are so clearly different in mechanics, audience and design that, all they have is character likeness infringement. But there are literally hundreds of pokemon, and I have a hard time suggesting Pokemon should be the sole rights holder for "Pokemon like character design". Given how broad the Pokemon character IP is, I am surprised Nintendo has not been sued themselves. But so different is IP law in Japan that Pokemon itself was altered at inception to avoid being in conflict with an entirely unrelated IP, Ultraman. The game was originally capsule monsters, but Ultraman has capsules, so they changed it, even though the stories and world's mechanics are otherwise entirely different.
- 3eb7988a1663 2y agoIt certainly raises questions about the not-Pokemon-wink-wink Digimon franchise. Or the recent Cassette Beasts[0] which has a lot more mechanical similarities to a Pokemon game than Palworld. [0] https://store.steampowered.com/app/1321440/Cassette_Beasts/ https://store.steampowered.com/app/1321440/Cassette_Beasts/
- ThrowawayR2 2y agoNote that it's for patents and not copyright (i.e. character likenesses), as many predicted. It'll be interesting to see which patents Nintendo is trying to assert. Given that Palworld is purely a game, it seems likely to be Nintendo's patents related to game mechanics (e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37062820 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37062820), which I think most people here are justifiably against.
- t-writescode 2y agoI am absolutely not a lawyer; but, I don't believe game mechanics are patentable in the United States (this is Japan, so of course that doesn't matter); but there's a reason there's a lot of -opoly games that aren't Monopoly (and the -opoly, non-Monopoly games are not Hasbro games, in general).
- ThrowawayR2 2y agoMy understanding is that game mechanics are not copyrightable but they may be patentable, e.g. the US patent for Shadow of Mordor's Nemesis system (https://www.gamesindustry.biz/warner-bros-finally-secures-patent-for-shadow-of-mordors-nemesis-system https://www.gamesindustry.biz/warner-bros-finally-secures-pa...).
- forrestthewoods 2y ago> I don't believe game mechanics are patentable in the United States They are. But it’s rarely done. And even more rarely enforced.
- Ekaros 2y agoGains from enforcing them likely are not great. And games in general are massive pit of potential prior-art... I would guess that if any of the big publishers attacked someone else people would willingly point out something prior-art just to spite those big companies.
- shikon7 2y agoPatents usually run out after 20 years, much faster than copyright, and Monopoly was around for much longer.
- jordemort 2y agoNintendo took so long to do this that I kind of assumed they didn’t actually care. The pal is kind of out of the ball at this point.
- fooqux 2y agoIt might just be they've got enough money to make them a juicy enough target to go after for damages. I can't imagine it took the lawyers this long to come up with something to sue them over, and the game didn't exactly fly under the radar... so I'm not sure what else it could be. I suppose there might have been a flurry of scary lawyer letters being sent back and forth and the lawsuit only happened once negotiations broke down.
- rgreekguy 2y agoI believe they were waiting for something, too. And the game is successful enough to make some bank out of it. Coromon also has tons of similarities, judging from the demo alone, and I doubt they were ever sued. Correct me if I am wrong, anyone.
- edm0nd 2y agoFor the curious, Palworld was released: Initial release date: January 19, 2024
- armada651 2y agoIt's probably because two months ago PocketPair announced a joint venture with Sony Music and Aniplex that includes merchandising. [1] The revenue from the Pokémon games is nothing compared to the revenue from merch; Pokémon merch generates more revenue per year than Pokémon GO generated over its entire lifetime. [2,3] Thus Nintendo is likely more concerned with consumer confusion between Palworld and Pokémon merch than between the games. On top of that it would damage The Pokémon Company's position in any negotiations surrounding merchandising agreements, because partners can use a potential Palworld merch deal as leverage to get a better deal from The Pokémon Company. [1] https://palworld.co.jp/en/news/?article_id=65768 https://palworld.co.jp/en/news/?article_id=65768 [2] https://www.pocketgamer.biz/the-pokmon-company-caught-108-billion-from-merch-and-licenced-goods-last-year/ https://www.pocketgamer.biz/the-pokmon-company-caught-108-bi... [3] https://www.pocketgamer.biz/pokmon-go-catches-nearly-8-billion-in-eight-years/ https://www.pocketgamer.biz/pokmon-go-catches-nearly-8-billi...
- bhouston 2y agoFor those wondering, here is a video that compares Pokemon with Palworld characters, there are a ton that are rip offs, and all together it is a pretty clear rip off: https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=WJtOmxEymR0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=WJtOmxEymR0
- mdavidn 2y agoNote that this suit is a patent claim, not the trademark or copyright claim one might expect from visual similarity.
- flykespice 2y agoI'm surprised Nintendo took so long to sue them. It was so obvious from the get-go.
- GaggiX 2y agoNone of these are rip-offs. The comparisons are kind of ridiculous, a Pal that looks like a penguin, they must have stolen that idea from the Pokemon that looks like a penguin. I don't want to live in a world where something like this would be considered copyright infringement, something that even Nintendo doesn't seem to focus on (I guess for a reason).
- bhouston 2y agoNot all of them, some of them are stretches, but quite a few of them are clear ripoffs if you are objective.
- GaggiX 2y agoWhich ones? List them, I don't see any rip offs. Maybe you're better than Nintendo lawyers at finding them.
- madamelic 2y agoThey are always sort of a stretch like "Electric mouse" or "Egyptian cat". In my non-lawyer opinion, it's in the same vein as saying that DC should sue Marvel over Captain Marvel being a Superman rip-off.
- phendrenad2 2y agoThis being a patent suit is very bizarre. Everyone was expecting a copyright lawsuit, if anything. I'm not a big fan of software patents, and it seems like they're only exercised as a convenient bludgeon against a rival, not based on something a company feels it legitimately invented.
- maxk42 2y agoNote that this suit was filed in Japan. Their laws may be very different from what most HN users are familiar with.
- forgotoldacc 2y agoJapanese laws pertaining to copyright/corporate rights in general can make the US look like a paradise of freedom. Another game company, Konami, is suing Cygames for--in short--having a system where characters compete and can be leveled up. Plus the concept of "fair use" technically kind of exists legally but not in practice. You sample something and the owner doesn't approve, you're screwed. You don't sample something but simply say something that lowers their reputation, you're screwed (the bar for "libel" is incredibly low--even facts can be successfully tried so long as it can be proven that the intention was to in some way lower a person or particularly a company's reputation). The last one is particularly funny since you'll see the media giving endless praise to a CEO/businessperson and treating them as Jesus 2.0, but the very day they die, the floodgates open and you find out they've committed every crime known to mankind and everyone around them knew it. Basically, Pocketpair is quite likely heavily screwed. Nintendo can attack them on several fronts and likely will. People saying they made a better Pokemon than Nintendo themselves probably angered a few people within the company and it's easier to take them out legally than to actually compete.
- Jach 2y agoGiven Nintendo's last lawsuit related to patents took several years and ended not with a court win or the game ever shut down during that time but with them getting a settlement, Pocketpair is likely fine. Pocketpair might have difficulties partnering with many businesses even outside of gaming in the future, since I've been led to believe the non-legal effects tend to matter quite a bit in Japan as well, but they have global appeal and can find foreign partners if they need to.
- internet101010 2y agoPalworld is what happens when Pokemon fans get fed up with the swill that Pokemon puts out every few years. While the primary goal of the game is to get all of the pals, most of your time is spent putting your pals to work building up your base, breeding better pals, and manufacturing the weapons needed in order to get even better pals. This is a stark contrast to Pokemon games, where you just walk around challenging gym leaders. It's an entirely different game. So if Pocketpair reskinned a few assets sure, pay Nintendo 5% at most. But those skins had nothing to do with the success of the game and Nintendo doesn't deserve anything more than that.
- spondylosaurus 2y agoNothing to do with its success? All the marketing/hype I saw for Palworld prior to its release was "it's like Pokemon, but fucked up!"
- melagonster 2y agoIP is so valuable; Hope we have a better system let everyone happy.
- skeaker 2y agoIs it really fair to call word of mouth "marketing" in this context, where it's implied to be intentionally pushed by the developer?
- Loughla 2y agoI've never played it. Are the mechanics of catching and fighting pals similar to Pokemon?
- op00to 2y agoCatching? Maybe. You use “balls” to catch things. A pokeball seems very similar to the ghost traps from Ghostbusters, for example. Fighting? Not at all similar, unless Psyduck suddenly got Gatling guns.
- 2y ago
- rty32 2y agoThe lawsuit was filed in a Japanese court. What if the company just stops offering the game in Japan? Unless the same patent also exists in other countries (which would require separate lawsuits in each jurisdiction that heavily depends on specific laws), whatever the outcome of this lawsuit won't matter elsewhere in the world, right?
- bearjaws 2y agoSuing for software patents is... an interesting move. Working with lawyers in my job they made it very clear software patents are a nightmare to enforce. I think Oracle v Google proves this pretty clearly.
- frosting1337 2y agoYeah, they definitely are, which would be why Nintendo has taken so long.
- bearjaws 2y agoI also just read both companies are in Japan, so Japanese patent law applies, which I have no idea what that looks like.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- pcwalton 2y agoThat's a US court precedent, which is irrelevant to the Japanese legal system.
- bhouston 2y ago> Working with lawyers in my job they made it very clear software patents are a nightmare to enforce. It depends which lawyers and which patents. I've see patent trolls win a few times up close. It sort of sucks.
- bastard_op 2y agoI never played any Pokemon, I always thought it was lame, but I absolutely love Palworld. I run my own server and we still play with others, so this makes me sad. I stopped buying Nintendo things years ago when they began going after emulators, rom sites, and others actively archiving and distributing these means. I don't support litigious companies and the vermin lawyers.
- frosting1337 2y agoIs it litigious if they're enforcing their own patents? They didn't immediately go after Palworld for copyright infringement, but dug deep and seemingly found something in violation of their own patents lol
- Aaron2222 2y agoThere are a large number of patents out there that have no business existing (overly broad, ridiculous broad, patents stuff that already existed or shouldn't be able to be patented, etc). Software patents in particular have quite a bad reputation for this. So yes, trying to enforce one's own patents can absolutely be litigious, since the patents themselves can have no business existing in the first place.
- bastard_op 2y agoEarly on there were countless pokemon clones back to the OG gameboy that were far more egregious in use of various pokemon features and methods, and there hasn't been legal claim to shut any of them down in 25 years. It is a well discussed topic with the pokemon vs palworld haters, so if Nintendo has anything, I imagine they found some minor method that probably shouldn't have had a patent anyways, but the Japanese agency over patents loving Nintendo for 100 years already gave it freely regardless. Now with Nintendo in short of revenue and late with a new platform for Christmas with their stock taking a beating, I guess this is how they'll make up some difference and feed their wild herd of lawyers hungry for some action in the mean time. Rabidly litigious companies still disgust me when outside developers fill a void they cannot or will not. I can buy from Amazon hard drives and entire systems filled with every Nintendo video game from the 80's on, maybe they should sic the lawyers on them instead of the little guys like Pocketpair putting a positive spin on the genre.
- mauvia 2y agoWhat patents does Nintendo and TPC own related to pokemon, I don't see that in the press release.
- mauvia 2y agoIf Japan has a 20 year patent limit, this is not about the concept of Pokemon. Pokemon was in the post 3rd gen era 20 years ago.
- ParadisoShlee 2y agoThe Assassination of Pocketpair, Inc by the Coward Nintendo Co., Ltd.
- DevScout 2y agoI played Palworld before, and honestly, my first thought was Pokémon.
- stonethrowaway 2y agoAny Japanese folks who practice law in Japan able to comment on this? A bit tired of the armchair lawyers from the West on this one.
- numpad0 2y agoJapanese && lawyer && English fluent && knows HN is practically an empty set
- Prickle 2y agoJapanese but not a lawyer. No clue. Need to wait for them to declare what the patents are. Some of the patents being shown in this thread went into effect after Palworld was revealed (not launched) so there is a lot of unknowns.
- cardosof 2y agoProbably Nintendo is suing on the catching mechanic which is pretty much the same in both games. In Palworld, the player has a team of Pals and, in order to catch a new Pal, they must fight and after some damage throw a catching ball at the right moment. Could someone patent a monster catching mechanic, anyway?
- lawrencejgd 2y agoThere existed games that used that mechanic before Pokemon like Megami Tensei.
- phire 2y agoThe capture mechanic was introduced all the way back in the first Pokemon game, which was released in 1996. As patents only last 20 years, it should have expired years ago. My understanding is that the patent must be filed before public demonstration (aka, the release of the game), or within a 1 year grace period, otherwise it's invalid.
- birracerveza 2y agoThey should change it so you catch Pals by shooting at them. There, lawsuit avoided.
- Willish42 2y agoFor anybody who's wondering, Nintendo doesn't _actually_ own Pokemon (a common misconception), but has a major stake in "The Pokemon Company", which does https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo#Subsidiaries https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo#Subsidiaries As such, I wonder if this structure makes it harder to sue over IP infringement. I agree with others here that patent infringement is a seemingly odd pick, but perhaps this also has to do with character design patents, since Palworld didn't explicitly use Nintendo's IP? Should be interesting regardless to see what happens
- 3eb7988a1663 2y agoThat is a fun fact! Doubly so, because according to Wikipedia, Pokemon is the highest grossing media franchise on the planet, with some estimated $98.8 billion in revenue. Second place is "Micky Mouse & Friends" at a measly $61.4 billion. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-grossing_media_franchises https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-grossing_media...
- jgtrosh 2y ago(+$45.4B for Disney princess)
- tourmalinetaco 2y agoWhich is a completely different series, and thus non-cumulative.
- zdw 2y agoIf you want a whole video about this, "Who Exactly Controls Pokémon, Anyway?" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfSKAvbAUUk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfSKAvbAUUk
- fracus 2y agoCouldn't Nintendo's lawyers be suing on behalf of the Pokemon stakeholder?
- modeless 2y agoIn response, Pocketpair has hired lawyers identical to Nintendo's, except with guns. https://hard-drive.net/hd/video-games/pocketpair-hires-identical-lawyers-with-guns/ https://hard-drive.net/hd/video-games/pocketpair-hires-ident...
- TechPlasma 2y agoWait to they hear about that one "Lock-picking Lawyer" then they'll always be scott free.
- sublinear 2y agoBadass dude!
- Dalewyn 2y ago[flagged]
- pinkmuffinere 2y agolol I can't tell if the linked article is satire, or if it is truthfuly repeating Pocketpair's stance. Either way I like it.
- mbilker 2y agoThe Hard Drive is a satirical news site like The Onion. They even say they are satire on their about page [1]. [1] https://hard-drive.net/about/ https://hard-drive.net/about/
- SigmundurM 2y agoAmazing lol! Though it is worthing that Nintendo is alleging patent infringement, not copyright infringement. IANAL (I Am Not A Lawyer), but that doesn't sound like they're going after the models used in Palworld, but more overall mechanics? Possibly this patent Nintendo has for what seems to be "a thing the player throws at another thing to initiate a fight with it" (IANAL): https://patents.justia.com/patent/20240278129 https://patents.justia.com/patent/20240278129
- JohnMakin 2y agoThere can be no lawsuit here without upsetting the entire gaming industry. Sue star wars survivor series for being a blatant ripoff of sekiro but based in star wars - where do you draw the line? Games have copied mechanics for as long as there have been games. I have no faith in the courts, however, and nintendo usually wins these stupid things.
- pcwalton 2y ago> There can be no lawsuit here without upsetting the entire gaming industry. Sue star wars survivor series for being a blatant ripoff of sekiro but based in star wars - where do you draw the line? At worst that would just result in that title not being offered for sale in Japan anymore. Remember, as a Japanese lawsuit, this suit's scope is limited to Japan.
- infotainment 2y agoIn that case, the company (which is Japanese) would presumably need to relocate to another country entirely, which would be nontrivial and would probably require replacing most of their staff. It's entirely possible such a move just isn't survivable for the game.
- JohnMakin 2y agoThat is a bad case though. Japan gaming industry still produces great titles. Meanwhile the US industry is suffering massive layoffs and brain drain, all while investing tons into predatory crap like candy crush or the 5 billionth cod reskin instead. Nintendo being a patent troll here does not help the japanese gaming industry nor the broader industry at large, it discourages competition at best.
- Mathnerd314 2y agoDoes anyone have the actual filing?
- joedwin 2y agothis one I think https://www.j-platpat.inpit.go.jp/c1801/PU/JP-2023-092953/11/en https://www.j-platpat.inpit.go.jp/c1801/PU/JP-2023-092953/11...
- Mathnerd314 2y agoI meant the actual court document. There is an electronic system, https://www.courts.go.jp/saiban/online/mints/index.html https://www.courts.go.jp/saiban/online/mints/index.html, but I am not sure it is public.
- pcwalton 2y agoReminder: This was filed in a Japanese court, so anything relating to the legal systems of other countries is irrelevant. The effects of the outcome of this case will be limited to Japan.
- lemoncookiechip 2y agoThis is likely one of the infringed patents: https://www.j-platpat.inpit.go.jp/c1801/PU/JP-2023-092953/11/en https://www.j-platpat.inpit.go.jp/c1801/PU/JP-2023-092953/11... It's the catching mechanic, detailed specifically (I believe it was filed because of the Legend of Arceus game).
- infotainment 2y agoThanks for linking this, this does seem likely: > A sighting direction within a virtual space is determined based on second operation input in a first mode, a player character is allowed to release an item affecting a field character disposed on a field within a virtual space toward the sighting direction on the basis of third operation input, a sighting direction is determined based on second operation input in a second mode, and the play character is allowed to release a fighting character who fights toward the sighting direction on the basis of the third operation input. It's also illustrative of the inherent absurdity of software patents—absolutely ridiculous that something so incredibly general could be patented, but here we are.
- trojan13 2y agoI love the images in that patent. Just imagine lawyers discussing images like this one: https://www.j-platpat.inpit.go.jp/gazette_work2/domestic/A/505092000/505092900/505092950/505092953/DDE0153E4308219FC32717546174BF58D51D7BB77EBA8B8241F3F17440263188/text/JPA%20505092953_i_000018.jpg?version=202409190812 https://www.j-platpat.inpit.go.jp/gazette_work2/domestic/A/5...
- bakugo 2y agoNintendo's legal department feels it's led by a bunch of extremely spoiled and jealous children. This lawsuit is like the corporate equivalent of a child seeing what another kid made in art class and getting angry because it's better than what they made. Instead of learning from it and trying to create something even better themselves next time, they just trying to destroy what the other kid made so it doesn't make them look bad. Also, apparently some of the relevant patents were filed by Nintendo after the release of Palworld, which makes it even worse. Unfortunately, since the lawsuit was filed in Japan and both companies are japanese, Nintendo will likely win by default.
- hd4 2y ago"They have spent the last few years doing nothing but suing fans so they won’t be prepared to face lawyers that are completely identical to them but are better because as I said before, they have guns.” Beautiful. I'm rooting for these guys.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- Fokamul 2y agoHello, yesterday I've patented "*", yes asterisk aka everything you write, create, your thoughts everything. So pay up! You must send me $100 for every word here!
- mrkramer 2y agoAnother desperate attempt by Nintendo to stifle creativity.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- codedokode 2y agoOn a related topic, there was a recent lawsuit from IBM against Zynga over some obvious patents (like showing ads along with content), but it seems that the news didn't appear on HN somehow?
- throwaway918299 2y agojust bought the game to contribute to PocketPairs defense fund, this is absurd