Step 1: Own one of the most profitable franchises ever Step 2: Don't reinvest profits, cut corners Step 3: WTF? How are people competing with us? Step 4: Engage in lawfare instead of fair competition
Nintendo doesn't actually own Pokemon or have any control over it as they are 2 other companies that own larger parts and rights to it. Nintendo just so happens to be the most famous of the 3
@@Badassdude1234 Oh, man. I didn't know Palworld was made by a Japanese company. Rough for them then. If it were up to me, American IP law wouldn't be as corporate friendly as it is.
They aren't going after design. They are going after mechanics or software. Apparently, Nintendo bought the rights to some Summon and Mounting patent after PalWorld was made, which should have gotten this case thrown out in an American court, but they're both Japanese, might be a different precedencts here but I think the goal is to bog down Pocket Pair in frivolous suits to waste money
Lawyers looking over it are saying its a SHOTGUN approach on the patents that are vague patents that they are trying to make stick. Palworld does not infringe on the copyright ARCH that is why they are tying this patent thing.
I know Japanese courts are very different than US courts, but considering this isn't a copyright issue, I'm gonna hope the Judge is well enough informed of, and aware of the situation to make the correct assessment that Nintendo is fucking loony.
@@lunasakara7306 Naw... bring back digital patent warfare in japan... I want companies forced to pay 500% of the total profit of games they have produced over including unlicensed patent infringing concepts like mini maps, hp bars, way points, or any other basic UI features in games since the 2000s.
@@dragonkingofthestars more so referring to the detailed open world pokemon game that people wanted for decades and nintendo despite all their money refusing to make it
What gets me is Gamefreak has been dropping the ball lately in Pokemon games but Nintendo still refuses to go to another team for a fresh take on the series. My friends were not impressed with the recent releases and went back to the previous few games to play though those again. Still, Nintendo is pretty underhanded for doing this.
Yeah, Nintendo cannot win a Copywright lawsuit as their lawyers and Legal teams have all Green Lit Palworld - they already lost that argument during construction. Pocket Pair and Poikemon/NIntendo met and went over with legal combs every Pal design - and were given the green card to move forward. Nintendo would LOSE that argument in a heartbeat if they tried, it is the reason they didn't attempt that instantly despite how similar the designs were. What Nintendo and Pokemon team are going after are the Patents on HOW the game's mechanics run: Catching a Creature in a device - Raising a Creature in a team - Creature obtaining new moves as it gets stronger in levels - Creature being used for competition against other Creatures - Creature following/being loyal or friendly to the Player after being caught - Those are the concepts Nintendo and Pokemon team are going after....I don't need to tell anyone else here how utterly INSANE this is - but they are trying their hand at it now. For whatever reason.
The best part is, Palworld openly passed their designed through the Nintendo legal team asking them to verify the legal integrity of their designs before game launch. I hope that's going to end up going a long way to make the judge realize this is very spiteful and petty lawsuit from Nintendo.
Here is the valid question.. they brought in pokemon arceus i think before pocketpair officially released palworld.. any chance that nintendo is likely going to use that as their smoking gun against pocketpair?
From my understanding that pretty much is what they are going with. Namely, they have a patent on sending a creature out to battle another creature without swapping to battle mode and being able to catch creatures under the same circumstances. Essentially, it is a repeat of Warner Bros. and the Nemesis system.@zuziiice8907
@@AscendantStoic apparently they just recently patented capturing creatures in balls and using them to fight. So recently as to be AFTER Palworld's release. So it looks like they patented it solely to take down Palworld.
@@GeraltofRivia22 So in otherwards, the court is going to see that Palworld was created BEFORE the concept was patented, and dismiss the case outright, because that's usually how that works. Fucking Nintendo being a petty jealous bitch.
@@GeraltofRivia22 If they did patent it after Pal World was released or they were made aware of its existence (it has been around for a while) then they can't win this, you can't patent something then retroactively sue people who were using it before you made the patent, that would utterly insane and open to abuse .. especially that Nintendo didn't invent any of these ideas to begin with, they come off as extremely petty and stupid.
The probable reason why they are going the patent route, is because Nintendo/game freak also has "stolen" designs from fan creators for their new pokemon. If they go and win a process, based on stealing designs of monsters, they would open a door for a precedent against themselves. With patents they wouldnt open this precedent, as fan artist rarely have their designs patented.
Fans probably couldn't sue for copyright anyway because they don't actually exploit the supposed copyright of the designs that pokemon stole, so no competition/confusion and no damages. But then again, japanese law is different
Depends on where. Here in Spain you have automatic rights to whatever "art"(be it written, a screenplay, a show, music, whatever) you create for life, unless you relinquish it or die, and then it's 50 years before it enters public domain.
@@nicolaspeigne1429at least in America, you wouldn’t be able to truly claim ownership of a character in someone else’s property. i don’t know anything about japanese law.
@@trndrd schitzo theory is that the next game they announced will be closer to palworld. I remember how legends of arceus came to be. It was a fan project, Nintendo did it's thing then made the legends of arceus
Bandai (owners of Digimon) would counter-sue Nintendo for the shit Pokemon had ripped off from them (you can't convince me the 'Mega-evolutions' bs are stealing ideas from Digimon).
@@StrayTato Fuck off there are 10,000 Pokémon including a cloud and a set of keys. You can't copyright a bee or a dragon. And you can't copyright cockfighting, we've been doing it for thousands of years.
Apparently, Pocketpair has just Tweeted that *they are unaware of any specific patents they have supposedly infringed upon and have not been notified of such details* *VERY* *SUSPICOUS* *INDEED*
so in summary, Nintendo is suing Palworld for specified patents for infringement from Pocketpair that they didn't even know existed. What kind of drugs that Nintendo smoking or using to make such nonsense claims?
@@NA-ud6qm apparently nintendo is trying to claim they own the concept of capturing magical creatures and using them to fight. i dont think they realise that if they win on this lawsuit it would make all the native japanese competitor to pokemon like DIGIMON have to sue nintendo.
@@johnnefilenmadrid5408especially considering that Palworld *_ALREADY_* went over it with Nintendo's lawyers to make sure they didn't infringe on copyright. If the lawyers didn't also look at the patents, it would be _fairly easy_ to claim malice on Nintendo's lawyer's part
Even in Japanese courts, Nintendo is very unlikely to win this. In fact, Nintendo better hope they don't win this, because if they do, then they are also breaking patent and presumably copyright law as many of their own designs and ideas are not original.
SMT's tame mechanic and Dragon Quest's creature design similarity will have every right to sue pokemon for everything they're worth should they succeed.
And if they do win they'll also have the legal obligation to go after literally every other creature collector game ever created. Can't do selective infringements if there are other things that also "violate" the sanctity of their patents. Yokai Watch, digimon, dragon quest and SMT would love to see them try.
@@Gordulan I don't think that's true at all, it certainly isn't in the US. I don't think even in Japan there's a legal obligation to sue someone for anything.
@@Hirome_Satou If it's patents then you have a legal obligation to enforce them for the duration of their enforceablility and force any product that infringe upon them off the marketplace. It's very much the case with pharmaceuticals in my experience so I don't see how non-enforcement of game mechanic patents is even an option.
I do recall Nintendo admitting they wouldn't be able to win a suit earlier this year. We'll see how this goes. Edit: Yeah, I'm pretty sure sure Nintendo tried this with Digimon and lost. And no, you can not confuse Pokemon with Palworld. They only look similar in that the creatures we inspired by the same animals. Bonus: Speaking of patenting mechanics, Namco added Galaga as a loading screen game in Soul Calibur...3? $? I have to check. But they immediately patented the loading game so no one else could do it. Japanese companies are cunts.
Nintendo is hoping Palworld will fold without a fight since Nintendo doesn't have an avenue to victory. They've been aware of Pocketpair for years, and patents require a timely execution of legal proceedings and that is assuming the claims aren't spurious, which due to how vague the patents are, they likely are. There will be no copyright followup.
Nintendo suing for patent violation instead of copyright infringement makes me think they're not as confident in their chances of success in court. Why else would they wait SO LONG and under a rather baffling complaint? We'll just to have wait and see how this plays out.
And it makes me think they *are* more confident. At this point, if they aren't confident, why bother? Palworld is already mostly played out. The sensation is over. The only reason they'd sure is if they strongly feel they have a case. It's only baffling to you because you aren't a Japanese Patent lawyer.
@@rhindlethered And you ARE a Japanese patent lawyer by chance? Probably not. So shut up and wait and see how this plays out like I originally suggested instead of being a condescending prick.
They had to wait, likely because the patents that are in violation weren't considered as "active" until just recently. It can take years for some patents to make it through judgement, since so many are submitted every single year.
Bad take about copyright. "Could mistake it for pokemon" argument is bullshit. If that was all it took, Digimon would not exist as a franchise (an average person can't distinguish between digimon and pokemon).
@@HaartieeTRUE Nintendo can't patent them though, because they weren't the first to market, many other games implemented then first, including dragon quest and shin megami tensei, and even if Nintendo could legitimately patent them the patent would have expired by now.
@@coopercummings8370 the patents are already filed and aproved. You can literally find them on the internet. The fact that in a sane word, they SHOULDN'T have been able to patent them is a different story They are filed for may of 2024
Sony was setting up Nintendo for a massive PR win with the ps5 pro announcement... All Nintendo had to do was announce a good and reasonably priced Switch 2... But then they decide to nuke good will by suing Palworld for essentially being competition.
Nintendo sneakly waiting for Palworld hype down so they can caught Pocket Paint underhanded. However should Nintendo win it'll hurt their upcoming Pokemon game reputation.
unfortunate, doubt. Nintendo pokemon fans are ravenous and soak up all things pokemon. It's like an addiction for them and this would just be another "oh that's just Nintendo, silly Nintendo." Moment for those people.
It's cute you think pokemon fans will care, they will continue buying it on mass. I mean if pokemon in it's current state isn't enough to negatively affect it, then nothing will.
A patent that seems to be either way to vague, or not stuff they created. They apparently took the summoning from a ball from a 1960s Japanese TV show (a Ultraman one, so not an obscure IP either). This feels like something that should get thrown out.
They did not make a copyright claim, so no, they would not win. Trying to patent ideas that predate Pokemon is far harder, they go down that route because they have no other choice.
The claim is spurious since they have no proof. At this point Pocket Pair has already made sure they broke no possible laws and it will be a losing battle for Nintendo.
Nintendo can't sue them over copyright infringement since their legal team already signed off on every single Palworld design before launch. And I'd guess Nintendo allowed Palworld to happen because, like a lot of us thought "No one is gonna play this goofy ah game" Now that Palworld has objectively secured millions of dollars and shamed Pokémon for their most recent games... Nintendo is just being a petty jealous bitch.
What this lawsuit really says: "The last generation of Pokemon games underperformed, so we're going to file a frivolous lawsuit in the hopes that our nearest competitor in that genre capitulates without a fight so we don't have to step up our game in the future." EDIT: I know that accounting isn't something most people are any good at, but most of you need to learn the difference between gross profit and net profit.
@@banbrado28 How much did they make compared to internal projections, and how long did they take to make back the money it costed to make, market, and distribute them (to get this, take the development cost and multiply it by 2 or 3)? Sales figures don't tell you the whole picture on their own.
@@matteomastrodomenico1231 Learn the difference between gross profit and net profit, compare the numbers, and come back to me. Units sold only tells you the former.
I'm sorry Arch, this is in no way shape or form a lawsuit based on what you thought would happen. You, me, and everyone else that thought there would be a lawsuit, or grounds for a lawsuit, would al be betting on a copyright lawsuit, not a patent infringement. Nintendo's statement about this is also broad enough to fit at least the Ever Given going through it, sideways. "we, at Nintendo, would like to state that, We, are breathing air!" basically. In the end, Nintendo is going to Nintendo, and all we can do is wait and see what the results are. I just hope you'll be as gleeful to report those results regardless of if they align with our speculations or not.
At this point: Copyright law is a greater detriment to culture and creativity THAN OUTRIGHT PIRACY. Copyright law was meant to protect artistic integrity, now it's the greatest weapon against free market competition.
This isn't a copyright case, though. It's a PATENT case. They already lost the copyright case as Pocketpair kept the 'receipts' from when they asked Nintendo legal to verify they were not in violation of any copyright when the game was created.
@@spambot_gpt7 Said argument could also work in another way. If the patented feature was in the legal review copy BEFORE the patent was filed, then Pocket Pair would also have a pretty easy 'Prior Art' argument against the patent itself. And also a 'bad faith' argument against the entire suit.
@@tanall5959 True. You are probably correct about the details. I was just saying that patents & copyright were invented to protect the small businesses from the big scaling copycats. And now they are used to protect the big boring establishment businesses from new innovators. Just imagine if someone had patented the concept of the ego-shooter and no one would have been able to innovate in that area for 20 years. Patents & copyright are mostly outdated concepts, kept alive by big money lobby groups.
Palworld winning wouldn't change anything, but nintendo winning would start a VERY dangerous precedent. Arch is confused about the whole copyright/patent thing.
The day that you can patent game mechanics is the day that the gaming industry truly dies. It's like taking a patent of brushstrokes or painting technique for art.
@@Kos-mos-Cos-mos Except number of totk attempts at patents were denied because they already existed in lots of games. But yeah, you can patent game mechanics, that's what Sega did with Crazy Taxi's directionnal arrow, Konami with minigames during loading screens, and WB Games with the Nemesis system from Shadow of Mordor.
Cause they where brainstorming how to sue... they couldnt go over copyright, so now they go over patents. Wich if its about game mechanics then good luck with that, cause you cant actually patent game mechanics
@@riptors9777 Even so, Palworld is a significantly different kind of game than any Pokemon game. It's an open world sandbox survival game with barely any RPG elements at all. Hard to imagine this lawsuit sticking, unless Nintendo simply brute forces the matter with bigger better lawyers.
Haha this is beyond dumb for many reasons one its nothing like Pokémon. Palworlds has monsters you raise sure it is also a farming, shooter, adventure game rpg. Pokémon is pretty much claiming anything that has creature's you raise and fight is Pokémon. This is like Pokémon suing Digimon because they both have monsters tou raise and fight
the best copyright argument they have is probably the actual monsters design themselves, and maybe the pokeball concept. The patents look like a shot in the dark, but when you have a Nintendo size budget for lawfare, they probably don't care.
Not to mention every gatcha game for you Collect ____ and have them battle for you. I mean that would technically count for almost every RPG on the market.
The only reason Palworld even got as much attention as it did is because the last four generations of Pokemon games have been removing features. Gen 8 really jumped the shark with removing the pokemon themselves. I'm at the point where I want to be the franchise to be handled by anyone other than TPC, Gamefreak, or their child companies.
How does this serve Nintendo's public relations image?. It seems misguided and petty quite frankly makes me less likely to promote their games and systems. 2024: year of the corporate blunder
It's less about their image and more about their aggressive business practices. Keep in mind that Nintendo is a very cutthroat when it comes to how they do things, even going so far as bully anyone who even smells like they might affect Nintendo's profits. If they can get away with shutting someone down, they will abso-fucking-lutely try.
I dont think their lawsuit are gonna work, plus this just make them look awful and gonna cause people to rally behind palworld. And its not like Nintendo has a monopoly on the concept of capturing creatures and making them fight, not to mention the games are completely different gameplay wise and even if the designs are similar they are also different enough to not be held liable for that stuff the law is very loose about that stuff, thats why their were so many off brand merch with just pikachu tail having a bit of brown and that was enough to make it legally distinct enough.. overall this is horrible decision by Nintendo heres hoping they lose.
I don't think Palworld would count as a copyright violation. It doesn't outright copy any pokemon or pokemon assets and is mostly original in their design.
Digital patents make copyright law look sane by comparison... WAYPOINTS were patented for over a decade, but the thing is IF nintendo wins this, they will end up getting sued 69 ways from Sunday for damages FAR greater than anything they could win... whats more, they will lose each suit. This would bring back a precedent that has basically been put to bed back in 2014. The only reason nintendo is now drowning in such lawsuits is because of that 2014 precedent.... God help gaming if we go back to random companies claiming to own the rights to basic concepts like FPS, or MMO, or MINIMAPS, or HP BARS.... with the full legal right sue anyone who does not license said concepts which they use. People are sitting on these bogus patents without the legal precedent to actually act on them. So I kinda hope nintendo sets that precedent in the Japanese courts. I'll have you know I own the digital patent to the design of ~character identifiers located in close proximity to health indicators~, and ohhh boy Nintendo is in for a few 1000 lawsuits. I'm going to be rich lol
Oh come off it! Whats next?! Is Namco going to go after Nintendo since alot of gen 1 mons are "based" off of Dragon Quest mobs!?!!!? Personally, I'd like to see the end of the age old debate of Pokemon vs Digimon.
Copyright has no chance. Pokemon exists in the same country as Digimon. They would lose. However if some insane process like how Sony patented microtransaction advertisement was infringed they got a better chance.
The problem here is that this lawsuit was filed in Japanese courts which are notorious for putting down any case of "fair use". Even if the Pals had original or inspired designs, completely original code, etc, the courts can still just say "Oh, this is too similar to Pokemon so you lose". That doesn't exist in the US court system and that was one of my major concerns when I realized Pocketpair was a Japanese company. They're facing an uphill court battle but I hope they stick it out and players support them through it.
What's the possibility of a connection to the timing between Akira Toriyama's death and Nintendo launching this lawsuit considering Nintendo is effectively guilty of the same bullshit as they ape'd off Toriyama's Dragon Quest for several pokemon?
This is like Blizzard suing every fantasy MMO for making a fantasy MMO. Its absurd. They got the greenlight to make the game because there are now over 1,000 different pokemon. They've gotten too diverse and now it's like Disney trying to sue someone because they had a mouse of any kind. Not to mention the fact that they got the green light before is most certainly going to be the first thing Palworld lawyers bring up. I can't think of a single thing that Pokemon does that isn't so generic that anyone could do it in their game and be fine, it's the total package that is their thing. And even then the simple addition of guns and the ability to not just kill but also EAT your Pal's makes Palworld more than distinct enough.
Nintendo had better hope they lose, because of they win, that would open the door for Atlus to sue the pants off of them and Game Freak, since Shin Megami Tensei did the whole "beat up and catch monsters and then make them fight for you" almost ten years before the first Pokemon games where even released. After they lose, Nintendo should make some heads roll in their legal dependent, because those bastards are as litigious as DisnESG, and this is an optics disaster for them, especially if it's true and then word gets out that their own legal department signed off on each and every one of Pal World's creature designs.
Gonna be honest here. If Nintendo wins this lawsuit, I will never buy another Nintendo product ever again, for as long as I continue to live. I've collected Legend of Zelda and Pokémon products since the 1990s. They will never get another dime from me, and I will actively look for every little thing I can do as a consumer to damage their business in a legal sense. This shit is anti-competitive to an extreme degree and *needs* to be punished, straight up. Frankly, this lawsuit is making me strongly reconsider getting the next-gen Switch successor when it comes out.
The funny thing is about that is pocketpair isn’t worth defending knowing their stupid deal with KuSony. Also this is likely gets settled out of court and the whole thing is a nothing burger. People overreacting at its finest.
@@rhindlethered ever hear of death by a thousand cuts? its rare for something large like a company to be given a oko. it starts with small chips and cracks then them neglecting said chips and cracks letting them get worse over time until the wall falls in. people talking and spreading word of foul deeds actually does do some damage, yes you can spin some bad pr into positive gta is proof of that. what nintendos doing? it can only be viewd negitively, theres no way they can spin it. which gives people more to talk about and spirals outward over time until their attention is diverted elsewhere. ninty REALLY doesnt want people paying attention to their patents... at least in the usa, alice like decisons might cause them severe headaches.
@@rhindlethered People like you are why we keep ending up with all our hobbies stolen from us. But go ahead, keep feeling OH SO SUPERIOR while taking it up the ass from these giant corpos going out of their way to monopolize the entire market.
good thing the palworld devs got the money to counter sue or fight back. the only reason why nintendo is suing, because the game was a smashing success.
Nintendo will never let a good thing happen with anything near their IPs if they can help it. They fear potential competitors getting off the ground, whether indie or organized, and look down upon anything they don't own. We learned this lesson a long, long time ago.
@@GareWorks The fact is, they didn’t. I could be here all day listing competitor games they didn’t sue, if you have a minimum sales goalpost. How about Genshin Impact? Yokai Watch? Anyway, I am challenging the OP’s assertion that Nintendo puts down their competitors for no good legal reason.
While many Palworld designs feel very much like they could have been from a Pokemon game and some even look kinda like direct parodies, I don't think the remblence is close enough for a realistic chance to win a copyright lawsuit. Nintendo probably thought suing over some patents might get the palworld creators entangled longer.
Apart from that they are not treated like direct parodies. You can't claim it is a parody while not making a parody of the source material. It sounds like a cope argument is you ask me. Also it isn't a copyright lawsuit. They can't win a copyright lawsuit, but they can win a patent lawsuit as the designs do infringe on the patents Nintendo has on all pokemons. You can't just steal the design, look and spirit of Lucario and then change it a little. Just like you can't steal the design and look of a designer handbag or some Nike shoes and call it your own. Those handbags and shoes have patents on them. The design is patented. You can make handbags and sues. You just can't make them look like a specific brand of Nike shoes.
@@Cloud_Seeker Still, considering how trigger happy Nintendo usually is, I am fairly confident they would have filed a suit ages ago, if the designs were close enough to make a clear-cut case. Nonetheless, it's probably up to the judges from now on.
@@Cloud_SeekerUou chose the worst example pal/mon to use. How else do you depict anubis, the god of death from egyptian folklore than using a jackel adorned in egyptian jewelry?
@@lorddaro7771to add to my comment to the other guy. This Palworld hired lawyers to sit beside nintendo lawyers and go through the designs to ensure they werent doing infringement of copywright designs. Theres some clear inspiration in some designs, yes, but this inspiration is due to the designs bearing the same sources, making it very hard to argue they were taken directly from nintendo. Nintendo cant touch a copywright suit, and if they could, they would have done something in the 4 years it took to release the game (or 3 after sn initial trailer got popular.)
@@shirothefish9688 Maybe not exactly how Lucario is made. You can't just take a dog and named it Anubis and get away by taking someone else design. Countless of other people have created their version of Anubis without stealing the look of Lucario. Your counter is not as good as you think it is.
Nintendo do not publish on PC/steam (As fare as I know) so Palworld might as well be a washing machine company as fare as customers go. Its a completely different category. This is what happens when a company refuses to sell to customers.
Why now? Because next week is the release of the next Zelda game. Nintendo does shady thing -> Controversy happens -> Zelda comes out and people forget about controversy and say how great Nintendo is
Nintendo are truly pathetic. I hope this stupid lawsuit is thrown out. It's funny how they haven't gone after the numerous other Pokemon clones - just the one that was actually successful. What a garbage company.
@@Q2F2 Copyright has nothing to do with patents. Palworld might actually infringe on their patents. But that is for the courts to decide. If you are going to tell me that Anubis and Lucario do not look like each other. I will tell you to check your eyes. Also. This video is garbage. Arch talks about statute of limitations, which is nonsense. Palworld is not even a year old, so statute of limitations do not play a part. Nintendo has more then 6-9 months to respond for obvious reasons. The Arch mistakes copyright for trademark. Which are not the same. You can't lose your copyright. Not until you have been dead for 70-100 years or so. Trademark however must be defended. If you don't defend it for 3 consecutive years it is considered abandoned. Which obviously do not apply as Palworld has not even existed for 1 year yet. And we know Nintendo has defended its trade mark within the last 3 years.
@@Cloud_Seeker 'This isn't about copyright, also they obviously copied Pokemon check your eyes' (Also I agree arch was wildly off base, but go off on that strawman dude)
If the patents in question are what everyone has so far SAID they are for, there's several other pretty big developers / publishers who it directly and immediately benefits pumping money into this. I mean, I can't really see Bandai giving up rights to Digimon on the basis of, "we totally claim that we have patents on taming and making monsters fight."
You cannot "lose your copyright". You can lose your ability to sue in a specific instance if you let it go on for long enough, but that only allows that one instance. You have no "duty" to protect it whatsoever. You only need to protect it to the level that *you* want. It is not like a trademark.
well, technically you can lose it… but only if you willingly sell it/sign it away, which you can do (and many people have… and regretted later. usually Work For Hire disputes, yada yada, etc). in America at least, you also do not need to register a copyright to have ownership of it. you legally own the copyright to any work of art you make as soon as you make it. that being said, if someone does infringe upon your work, it’s going to be harder to prove that it is yours if you didn’t register it. luckily, copyright registration is simple and easy, and you can actually register all the works you made in a year at one time to save on the registration fee (you only pay when you register, it’s not based on how many things you register …. or at least that’s how it was a decade ago. i’ll admit, it’s been a long time since i left education and was teaching students how to do this stuff, so it’s possible things have changed with those specific regulations. so apologies to anyone if this info is no longer valid🤷♂️😅)
The game has been announced over 2 years ago and Nintendo had almost 3 years to scrutinize it for copyright infringement and they did nothing in that time. Now they are suing for patent infringement. If the word patent is correct and not a mistranslation, then the only possible thing Nintendo can be suing for are the pokeball lookalikes used in Palworld to capture the monsters.
I know of A game mechanic that has been patented, one wich is quite famous: the nemesis system from "middle earth: shadow of mordor/war". That system make certain orc officier stronger as they fight you and survive or kill you. This mechanic has never been done elsewhere in any other game since, BUUUUUUT the fact that it was never tried again mean that it was not challenge in court in front of a judge either so... gray zone? another one wich i cant remember the name was during a game between level, some kind of mini-game during a loading segment to make the loading time less boring. It was patented decade ago and never challenged as to make sure everyone loading time would remain boring.
Nintendo are mistaken if they think this will turn out their favor:- A)They waited for too long, they will claim it was to "investigate" but what it looks like is that they waited till the popularity if the game died down a bit in order to not anger too many people (they will come off as underhanded and scummy) B)Ironically Nintendo is accused regularly of copying fan designs and using them in their games without compensating the fans, wonder how they will defend that 😅 C)There is zero chance of misteking Palworld for Pokemon, they are on two separate systems and different genres, and Nintendo doesn't own the concepts of capturing and training monsters or cute animal designs, also never sued Digimon, Monster Rancher or Temtem, they won't win this. Also Arch, the deadly prank Israel pulled off was aganist the Lebanese Hezbollah group not Palestinians.
C: accoeding to tue patents they just filed, they actually do own that. Which is fucking wild. Monster rancher doesnt fall under that mechanic as you are raising them. Digimon doesnt for similar reasons, and tem tem i dont know enough of. But theres also casette beasts. Nintendo is flying really close to the sun here, and i hope their wings melt hard.
Looks like Nintendo and Pokemon already lost. So they won against a number of Chinese companies falsely believing momentum will carry them here and yet they filed a patent lawsuit.
They win copyright? Wtf are you talking about arch, they don't own the concept of capturing monsters. And if you say they look alike so palworld is in the wrong, then every military shooter should sue each other.
You don’t want Nintendo to win this, Nintendo is trying to claim they own the concept of monster collecting, it’s kinda like when react Bros tried to own the concept of reacting.
I personally think this is just a scare tactic suit to see if Pocketpair will willingly back down. Not sure if they're correct but many a lawyer has said that this would be a difficult suit for Nintendo to actually win, even given Japan's severe copywrite laws. Frankly the game is more like ARK than Pokemon so my OPINION is, best case for Nintendo would be Pocketpair having to change some of the pals that are "a bit to close" to Pokemon.
The devs/publishers of Lord of the Rings: Shadow of War patented the nemesis system I believe. And naturally have failed to do anything with it after that game.
If Nintendo dose win, It would be the best time for SE's time to strike with the same lawsuit due to the fact that a lot of the gen 1 pokemon where blatant rip-offs of Dragon Quest monsters.
For what i checked, people are saying that this is patents made in Pokemon Arceus, after Palworld creation. I don't have much details but i would love to see someone explore this.
Yeah, I would like to know what exactly was patented by Nintendo in this case tbh because the idea of patenting game mechanics just seems... so freaking strange.
If only the court of law could be decided by popular opinion, instead of simply whichever party has the most money. Imagine a world where the more well liked product had the strongest legal protections. Giant companies might actually have to please their customers to maintain their market domination, if that were the case. And Palworld would beat Nintendo in a landslide.
In the case of 'owning' game mechanics, WOTC has claimed copyright (but not patent , I think) on the 'tap' mechanic (turning a card sideways to indicate activation and/or exhaustion of a card), which is tenous at best… but that’s probably a reason no other card games have used it and use other ways to handle similar functions.
A problem Palworld's devs have to deal with though is a court system full of old people who have no clue about gaming. Arguments such as how they are completely different genres of game or on different platforms will fly far over the heads of the people deciding if they're at fault or not.
@@AnotherGuyTheXone Correct, I was absolutely sure they were Chinese. My point is invalid and I am honestly baffled, Pocket Pair must have known their chances in Japan to defend this in court are low, as it's literal patent hellhole. I really wonder what's their plan.
Nintendo sit on a lot of patents like the direction cross for example. But they don't go to court and use them for flex most of the time. Palwold called the bluff and now Nintendo must go to court and risk loosing some patents recognition or give up and let everyone know those treats are empty.
Ooh we got an elitist over here. Sound the alarm! Its a casual system made incredibly small and sold for far less. Obviously its underpowered compared to others. Doesnt make it worse as a console. Its objectively better as a handheld than other consoles (by default, but still a large win).
just a reminder they could of dealt with Pocket pair years ago their both japanise company and both would know what the other is working on, and Pokemon only recently Patented the catch a mon thing as well as the other patent, this is clearly targeted.
Interesting... But how can that be the case? Pokemon Arceus is the only game I can think of as an example that could have been copied and the two games are sold on completely separate platforms.
@@NA-ud6qmthese days consoles use basically the same programming languages as PCs so it's not impossible. Nintendo has also outsourced some of their development to chinese companies. But I doubt that's the line they are taking with this.
Step 1: Own one of the most profitable franchises ever
Step 2: Don't reinvest profits, cut corners
Step 3: WTF? How are people competing with us?
Step 4: Engage in lawfare instead of fair competition
This would never happen if Satoru Iwata was still in charge.
like how the Mass Effect Choice Wheel has had multiple indy companies sued over it
1 let the scammer make money
2 precisely prepare the claim for rights to make the greatest possible example
3 Take Action
The Games Workshop model, those of us old enough remember what happened to Chapter House
Nintendo doesn't actually own Pokemon or have any control over it as they are 2 other companies that own larger parts and rights to it.
Nintendo just so happens to be the most famous of the 3
Its not enough to simply be able to mistake the two products. If that's the case all military shooters could sue each other.
Patent laws in Japan seem to be far different. If this was an American Issue this lawsuit would be a joke.
@@Badassdude1234 Japanese laws are re****ded. Who knows what will happen there.
@@Badassdude1234
Oh, man. I didn't know Palworld was made by a Japanese company. Rough for them then. If it were up to me, American IP law wouldn't be as corporate friendly as it is.
They aren't going after design. They are going after mechanics or software. Apparently, Nintendo bought the rights to some Summon and Mounting patent after PalWorld was made, which should have gotten this case thrown out in an American court, but they're both Japanese, might be a different precedencts here but I think the goal is to bog down Pocket Pair in frivolous suits to waste money
@@Badassdude1234
Japanese version would be anime style rpgs.
Lawyers looking over it are saying its a SHOTGUN approach on the patents that are vague patents that they are trying to make stick. Palworld does not infringe on the copyright ARCH that is why they are tying this patent thing.
That's what I thought, If this was an infringement on copyright how is world of Warcraft not getting smashed for battle pets?
I know Japanese courts are very different than US courts, but considering this isn't a copyright issue, I'm gonna hope the Judge is well enough informed of, and aware of the situation to make the correct assessment that Nintendo is fucking loony.
@@lunasakara7306 Naw... bring back digital patent warfare in japan... I want companies forced to pay 500% of the total profit of games they have produced over including unlicensed patent infringing concepts like mini maps, hp bars, way points, or any other basic UI features in games since the 2000s.
@@theprophetofhate7188 anyone still remember mini game playable during loading screen? iirc that was patented too.
@@rashidisw It is.
nintendo :"we will not give the fans what they want and nobody else is allowed to either"
Fuck Nintendo
while i get the syntment, some of the designs from palworld are just . . .really? like they literally have a goodra with a plant on it's head!
@@dragonkingofthestars nobody owns the rights to an art concept.
@@ghost7685 Disney can get frecked
@@dragonkingofthestars more so referring to the detailed open world pokemon game that people wanted for decades and nintendo despite all their money refusing to make it
>suing for "damages".
Nintendo: You've damaged our brand!
Fans: *looks at Sword/Shield and Scarlet/Violet* You have done that yourself.
I think you mean Gamefreak as they are a 3rd party studio and part owner of pokemon as well they are also the team behind making the games
Scarlet/Violet is really good though
Eh, I don’t think it’s going to be that simple.
@@4wheal nintendo owns the ip and rules it like a tyrant king if they can do that to customers then they can tell gamefreak to stf or be fired,
@@housewilma4904 No, they dont they part own the IP with GameFreak and Creatures Inc and dont really have much more power than the others.
Nintendo: "I grant you the highest honour I have" *lawsuit*
Nintendo try not to sue challenge: Impossible
@@VioletDeathRei Nintendo is a very litigious company. I'm surprised more people aren't aware of that.
What gets me is Gamefreak has been dropping the ball lately in Pokemon games but Nintendo still refuses to go to another team for a fresh take on the series. My friends were not impressed with the recent releases and went back to the previous few games to play though those again. Still, Nintendo is pretty underhanded for doing this.
@@mrbigglezworth42 Sony dose this and no one complains Blizzard dose this and no one complains actavision unisoft so on and so on
@@ThatGuyNamedRick are us and Scarlwt/Violet we’re the best games though.
Yeah, Nintendo cannot win a Copywright lawsuit as their lawyers and Legal teams have all Green Lit Palworld - they already lost that argument during construction. Pocket Pair and Poikemon/NIntendo met and went over with legal combs every Pal design - and were given the green card to move forward. Nintendo would LOSE that argument in a heartbeat if they tried, it is the reason they didn't attempt that instantly despite how similar the designs were.
What Nintendo and Pokemon team are going after are the Patents on HOW the game's mechanics run:
Catching a Creature in a device -
Raising a Creature in a team -
Creature obtaining new moves as it gets stronger in levels -
Creature being used for competition against other Creatures -
Creature following/being loyal or friendly to the Player after being caught -
Those are the concepts Nintendo and Pokemon team are going after....I don't need to tell anyone else here how utterly INSANE this is - but they are trying their hand at it now. For whatever reason.
This is me speaking as a Pokemon fan.
_May Nintendo lose._
Seriously, they need a kick in the pants.
They actually have a patent on that?
so nintendo sue pocket pair and after that get sued by sega ? shin megani tensei is older them pokemon
Pokemon Red was released in 1996? That is over 20 years ago. Meaning all of those must have already expired. Or Pokemon game itself is prior art.
They neither own nor did they create these systems, capturing monsters to train them as pets or for combat predates Pokemon games.
No Arch. They could not win a copyright claim. They literally have 0 chance which is why they don't make that argument.
The best part is, Palworld openly passed their designed through the Nintendo legal team asking them to verify the legal integrity of their designs before game launch.
I hope that's going to end up going a long way to make the judge realize this is very spiteful and petty lawsuit from Nintendo.
If that is true, it would require divine intervention on behalf of a corrupt judge to give Nintendo the W on that one.
Ahhhh under japans copyright they may have a chance since they are both Japanese companies
Here is the valid question.. they brought in pokemon arceus i think before pocketpair officially released palworld.. any chance that nintendo is likely going to use that as their smoking gun against pocketpair?
From my understanding that pretty much is what they are going with. Namely, they have a patent on sending a creature out to battle another creature without swapping to battle mode and being able to catch creatures under the same circumstances. Essentially, it is a repeat of Warner Bros. and the Nemesis system.@zuziiice8907
Nintendo has zero basis for any copyright infringement claims. That's why this has taken so long and is going after patents instead.
Which is even dumber, they dint own these ideas of capturing monsters and training them nor did they create them.
@@AscendantStoic apparently they just recently patented capturing creatures in balls and using them to fight. So recently as to be AFTER Palworld's release. So it looks like they patented it solely to take down Palworld.
@@GeraltofRivia22 So in otherwards, the court is going to see that Palworld was created BEFORE the concept was patented, and dismiss the case outright, because that's usually how that works.
Fucking Nintendo being a petty jealous bitch.
@@GeraltofRivia22 If they did patent it after Pal World was released or they were made aware of its existence (it has been around for a while) then they can't win this, you can't patent something then retroactively sue people who were using it before you made the patent, that would utterly insane and open to abuse .. especially that Nintendo didn't invent any of these ideas to begin with, they come off as extremely petty and stupid.
@@AscendantStoic I saw the patent, it was filed in May of this year. They are retroactively suing Palworld.
The probable reason why they are going the patent route, is because Nintendo/game freak also has "stolen" designs from fan creators for their new pokemon. If they go and win a process, based on stealing designs of monsters, they would open a door for a precedent against themselves. With patents they wouldnt open this precedent, as fan artist rarely have their designs patented.
Could you write me examples?
Fans probably couldn't sue for copyright anyway because they don't actually exploit the supposed copyright of the designs that pokemon stole, so no competition/confusion and no damages.
But then again, japanese law is different
Depends on where. Here in Spain you have automatic rights to whatever "art"(be it written, a screenplay, a show, music, whatever) you create for life, unless you relinquish it or die, and then it's 50 years before it enters public domain.
@@nicolaspeigne1429at least in America, you wouldn’t be able to truly claim ownership of a character in someone else’s property. i don’t know anything about japanese law.
Arguably they already had that risk
Nintendo are grasping at straws. They are more willing to sue Palworld than make a good Pokemon game.
Acktshually their next game spent an additional year in the conceptualization stage. Surely that will make all the difference 🤓
They waited till the company made profits.
@@DonPetexX which makes no sense, since Nintendo doesn't have a leg to stand on.
@@trndrd schitzo theory is that the next game they announced will be closer to palworld. I remember how legends of arceus came to be. It was a fan project, Nintendo did it's thing then made the legends of arceus
Gamefreak*
This got me thinking. Did nintendo ever sue Digimon or monster rancher for also being Pokémon """"knock offs""""?
Bandai (owners of Digimon) would counter-sue Nintendo for the shit Pokemon had ripped off from them (you can't convince me the 'Mega-evolutions' bs are stealing ideas from Digimon).
Funny enough, Dragonquest Monsters and Shin Megami Tensei are older than Pokemon
No because their designs were original and didn't look like Pokémon mixed together
@@StrayTato Nah it's because they were the original, and are companies capable of fighting back
@@StrayTato
Fuck off there are 10,000 Pokémon including a cloud and a set of keys. You can't copyright a bee or a dragon.
And you can't copyright cockfighting, we've been doing it for thousands of years.
Apparently, Pocketpair has just Tweeted that *they are unaware of any specific patents they have supposedly infringed upon and have not been notified of such details*
*VERY*
*SUSPICOUS*
*INDEED*
Yeah like what patents can Nintendo own via gaming that Palworld infringed upon? That is just very strange imo.
so in summary, Nintendo is suing Palworld for specified patents for infringement from Pocketpair that they didn't even know existed.
What kind of drugs that Nintendo smoking or using to make such nonsense claims?
@@NA-ud6qm apparently nintendo is trying to claim they own the concept of capturing magical creatures and using them to fight.
i dont think they realise that if they win on this lawsuit it would make all the native japanese competitor to pokemon like DIGIMON have to sue nintendo.
@@johnnefilenmadrid5408bong-smoked dollar and yen burned bills fumes
@@johnnefilenmadrid5408especially considering that Palworld *_ALREADY_* went over it with Nintendo's lawyers to make sure they didn't infringe on copyright. If the lawyers didn't also look at the patents, it would be _fairly easy_ to claim malice on Nintendo's lawyer's part
Even in Japanese courts, Nintendo is very unlikely to win this. In fact, Nintendo better hope they don't win this, because if they do, then they are also breaking patent and presumably copyright law as many of their own designs and ideas are not original.
SMT's tame mechanic and Dragon Quest's creature design similarity will have every right to sue pokemon for everything they're worth should they succeed.
And if they do win they'll also have the legal obligation to go after literally every other creature collector game ever created. Can't do selective infringements if there are other things that also "violate" the sanctity of their patents. Yokai Watch, digimon, dragon quest and SMT would love to see them try.
@@Gordulan I don't think that's true at all, it certainly isn't in the US. I don't think even in Japan there's a legal obligation to sue someone for anything.
@@Gordulanfunny thing, digimon predates pokemon, so i'd love to see nintendo try
@@Hirome_Satou If it's patents then you have a legal obligation to enforce them for the duration of their enforceablility and force any product that infringe upon them off the marketplace. It's very much the case with pharmaceuticals in my experience so I don't see how non-enforcement of game mechanic patents is even an option.
I do recall Nintendo admitting they wouldn't be able to win a suit earlier this year. We'll see how this goes.
Edit: Yeah, I'm pretty sure sure Nintendo tried this with Digimon and lost. And no, you can not confuse Pokemon with Palworld. They only look similar in that the creatures we inspired by the same animals.
Bonus: Speaking of patenting mechanics, Namco added Galaga as a loading screen game in Soul Calibur...3? $? I have to check. But they immediately patented the loading game so no one else could do it. Japanese companies are cunts.
And then they never used outside of dragonball games
Which isn't how patents work, at least in the US. You can't patent something that has already been in use.
It was ridge racer i think. Loading screen mini games are much older than SC3
@@PanicGun A fellow enjoyer of Budokai I see.
Nintendo is hoping Palworld will fold without a fight since Nintendo doesn't have an avenue to victory. They've been aware of Pocketpair for years, and patents require a timely execution of legal proceedings and that is assuming the claims aren't spurious, which due to how vague the patents are, they likely are. There will be no copyright followup.
Nintendo suing for patent violation instead of copyright infringement makes me think they're not as confident in their chances of success in court. Why else would they wait SO LONG and under a rather baffling complaint? We'll just to have wait and see how this plays out.
And it makes me think they *are* more confident. At this point, if they aren't confident, why bother? Palworld is already mostly played out. The sensation is over. The only reason they'd sure is if they strongly feel they have a case. It's only baffling to you because you aren't a Japanese Patent lawyer.
@@rhindlethered And you ARE a Japanese patent lawyer by chance? Probably not. So shut up and wait and see how this plays out like I originally suggested instead of being a condescending prick.
@@rhindlethered Mate, you aren't anymore knowledgeable about Japanese law than I am so take your condescension and shove it.
@@rhindlethered You are confusing confidence with delusion, which is what nintendo is currently suffering form.
They had to wait, likely because the patents that are in violation weren't considered as "active" until just recently. It can take years for some patents to make it through judgement, since so many are submitted every single year.
Bad take about copyright. "Could mistake it for pokemon" argument is bullshit. If that was all it took, Digimon would not exist as a franchise (an average person can't distinguish between digimon and pokemon).
Pretty sure it's going to be more centric on gameplay mechanics. Which itself is stupid.
@@tyvamakes5226 gameplay mechanics are explicitly not copywriteable.
@@coopercummings8370 they are 'apparantly' pattentable tho, which is what nintendo is filing the lawsuit about.
@@HaartieeTRUE Nintendo can't patent them though, because they weren't the first to market, many other games implemented then first, including dragon quest and shin megami tensei, and even if Nintendo could legitimately patent them the patent would have expired by now.
@@coopercummings8370 the patents are already filed and aproved. You can literally find them on the internet.
The fact that in a sane word, they SHOULDN'T have been able to patent them is a different story
They are filed for may of 2024
Oh my oh why can't we keep nice things
Sony was setting up Nintendo for a massive PR win with the ps5 pro announcement... All Nintendo had to do was announce a good and reasonably priced Switch 2... But then they decide to nuke good will by suing Palworld for essentially being competition.
They can still do that at least.
@@mrconroy4672 Won't have the same amount of impact.
@@1992holycrap This whole case is likely going to end up a nothing burger long term.
@@mrconroy4672 We can only hope so...
@@1992holycrap calling it now, it’s likely going to end up being an out of court settlement with neither side truly winning.
Nintendo sneakly waiting for Palworld hype down so they can caught Pocket Paint underhanded. However should Nintendo win it'll hurt their upcoming Pokemon game reputation.
unfortunate, doubt. Nintendo pokemon fans are ravenous and soak up all things pokemon. It's like an addiction for them and this would just be another "oh that's just Nintendo, silly Nintendo." Moment for those people.
Nah, pokemon players are no different than nintendo's lapdog, they would buy anything nintendo vomit out.
It's not like it's gonna be a "bud light" moment of eternal scorn. Poke/Nintendo fans will buy it up anyway
It's cute you think pokemon fans will care, they will continue buying it on mass. I mean if pokemon in it's current state isn't enough to negatively affect it, then nothing will.
given how many were in the steam forums screaming I doubt that
seemed a salty little crowd so they will lap it up!
Nintendo is suing Palworld over a patent.
The patent, which was filed five months *after* the release of Palworld.
We are living in clown world.
A patent that seems to be either way to vague, or not stuff they created.
They apparently took the summoning from a ball from a 1960s Japanese TV show (a Ultraman one, so not an obscure IP either).
This feels like something that should get thrown out.
They did not make a copyright claim, so no, they would not win. Trying to patent ideas that predate Pokemon is far harder, they go down that route because they have no other choice.
The claim is spurious since they have no proof. At this point Pocket Pair has already made sure they broke no possible laws and it will be a losing battle for Nintendo.
Nintendo can't sue them over copyright infringement since their legal team already signed off on every single Palworld design before launch.
And I'd guess Nintendo allowed Palworld to happen because, like a lot of us thought "No one is gonna play this goofy ah game"
Now that Palworld has objectively secured millions of dollars and shamed Pokémon for their most recent games... Nintendo is just being a petty jealous bitch.
The goal is not to win but to Stall. The longer they can make PW waste money the better for Nintendo cause they can afford to waste time in court
@@sanguinetales That is so dumb I almost had a stroke reading your comment
like how the Mass Effect Choice Wheel has had multiple indy companies sued over it
@@NitwitsWorldits the truth though, Japanese companies are NOTORIOUS for killing competition and small companies with court time.
Lets not forget that pokemon legends of arceus was originally a fan project that nintendo struck down and then stole for themselves.
I did not know that. That explains why the game was so good.
Not the first time they've done that.
This is simply made up
im still pissed at nintendo for going after the emulation scene
Especially when emulation is keeping certain games that Nintendo no longer sells from disappearing entirely.
@@Cowboycomando54 hell for me they went after the switch emulator and citra (one of the emulators I worked on) got caught in the cross fire.
What this lawsuit really says:
"The last generation of Pokemon games underperformed, so we're going to file a frivolous lawsuit in the hopes that our nearest competitor in that genre capitulates without a fight so we don't have to step up our game in the future."
EDIT: I know that accounting isn't something most people are any good at, but most of you need to learn the difference between gross profit and net profit.
They didn't underperform. They sucked but sold like crazy.
@@banbrado28 How much did they make compared to internal projections, and how long did they take to make back the money it costed to make, market, and distribute them (to get this, take the development cost and multiply it by 2 or 3)?
Sales figures don't tell you the whole picture on their own.
@@z3r0_35 It was the 3rd best-selling generation in the franchise's history, I think they're satisfied.
@@matteomastrodomenico1231 Learn the difference between gross profit and net profit, compare the numbers, and come back to me. Units sold only tells you the former.
I'm sorry Arch, this is in no way shape or form a lawsuit based on what you thought would happen.
You, me, and everyone else that thought there would be a lawsuit, or grounds for a lawsuit, would al be betting on a copyright lawsuit, not a patent infringement.
Nintendo's statement about this is also broad enough to fit at least the Ever Given going through it, sideways.
"we, at Nintendo, would like to state that, We, are breathing air!" basically.
In the end, Nintendo is going to Nintendo, and all we can do is wait and see what the results are.
I just hope you'll be as gleeful to report those results regardless of if they align with our speculations or not.
At this point: Copyright law is a greater detriment to culture and creativity THAN OUTRIGHT PIRACY.
Copyright law was meant to protect artistic integrity, now it's the greatest weapon against free market competition.
This isn't a copyright case, though. It's a PATENT case. They already lost the copyright case as Pocketpair kept the 'receipts' from when they asked Nintendo legal to verify they were not in violation of any copyright when the game was created.
@@tanall5959 Same argument applies to patents.
@@spambot_gpt7spambot.
@@spambot_gpt7 Said argument could also work in another way. If the patented feature was in the legal review copy BEFORE the patent was filed, then Pocket Pair would also have a pretty easy 'Prior Art' argument against the patent itself. And also a 'bad faith' argument against the entire suit.
@@tanall5959 True.
You are probably correct about the details.
I was just saying that patents & copyright were invented to protect the small businesses from the big scaling copycats.
And now they are used to protect the big boring establishment businesses from new innovators.
Just imagine if someone had patented the concept of the ego-shooter and no one would have been able to innovate in that area for 20 years.
Patents & copyright are mostly outdated concepts, kept alive by big money lobby groups.
Do note Palworld winning might not impact anything, since not all law systems run on precedents.
but maybe you can use it as an example in a different law suit?
Palworld winning wouldn't change anything, but nintendo winning would start a VERY dangerous precedent. Arch is confused about the whole copyright/patent thing.
I'm taking a guess: capturing monsters as slaves inside a ball will be the patent.
The day that you can patent game mechanics is the day that the gaming industry truly dies. It's like taking a patent of brushstrokes or painting technique for art.
You can and nintendo did, example totk mechanics.
@@Kos-mos-Cos-mos Except number of totk attempts at patents were denied because they already existed in lots of games.
But yeah, you can patent game mechanics, that's what Sega did with Crazy Taxi's directionnal arrow, Konami with minigames during loading screens, and WB Games with the Nemesis system from Shadow of Mordor.
It took Nintendo longer to sue than I thought it would
Cause they where brainstorming how to sue... they couldnt go over copyright, so now they go over patents. Wich if its about game mechanics then good luck with that, cause you cant actually patent game mechanics
@@riptors9777 patents? well that's not the one id'd expect at all.
... the nemesis system was patented by wb though and it's a gameplay mechanic
@@riptors9777
Even so, Palworld is a significantly different kind of game than any Pokemon game. It's an open world sandbox survival game with barely any RPG elements at all. Hard to imagine this lawsuit sticking, unless Nintendo simply brute forces the matter with bigger better lawyers.
@@originalDjango that's more a case of people being too scared to try and fight warner brothers money in court then it being legally right.
Haha this is beyond dumb for many reasons one its nothing like Pokémon. Palworlds has monsters you raise sure it is also a farming, shooter, adventure game rpg. Pokémon is pretty much claiming anything that has creature's you raise and fight is Pokémon. This is like Pokémon suing Digimon because they both have monsters tou raise and fight
the best copyright argument they have is probably the actual monsters design themselves, and maybe the pokeball concept.
The patents look like a shot in the dark, but when you have a Nintendo size budget for lawfare, they probably don't care.
digimon, the creatures of tales of symphonia 2, monster rancher, ffxv's multiplayer dlc with the chocobo colosseum, yokai watch, the list goes on
Their own designs aren't even original, Square Enix should sue nintendo for stealing Dragon Quest designs.
They might as well sue Temtem and various other "collect colorful pets and have them battle" games, from mobile to Steam.
Coromon springs to mind as well
Not to mention every gatcha game for you Collect ____ and have them battle for you. I mean that would technically count for almost every RPG on the market.
Temtem is also being sold on the Nintendo eShop and is way closer to Pokémon than Palworld.
Nintendo : "SHAMEFUR DISPRAY"
The only reason Palworld even got as much attention as it did is because the last four generations of Pokemon games have been removing features. Gen 8 really jumped the shark with removing the pokemon themselves. I'm at the point where I want to be the franchise to be handled by anyone other than TPC, Gamefreak, or their child companies.
The sad thing is that Palworld shouldn’t be held in high regard knowing their deal with KuSony.
Nintendo being Nintendo nothing else is new here.
Your username isn't that original either
@@NitwitsWorld neither is your mother what’s your point ???
@@gamingforever9121 my mom’s name isn’t ditwit! 🤣👋
@@NitwitsWorld no it’s slag! 😂
@@NitwitsWorld also you spelled dim wit wrong.😑
How does this serve Nintendo's public relations image?. It seems misguided and petty quite frankly makes me less likely to promote their games and systems.
2024: year of the corporate blunder
I agree, but Nintendo has been making a lot of these "blunders" in recent years.
It's less about their image and more about their aggressive business practices. Keep in mind that Nintendo is a very cutthroat when it comes to how they do things, even going so far as bully anyone who even smells like they might affect Nintendo's profits. If they can get away with shutting someone down, they will abso-fucking-lutely try.
I dont think their lawsuit are gonna work, plus this just make them look awful and gonna cause people to rally behind palworld. And its not like Nintendo has a monopoly on the concept of capturing creatures and making them fight, not to mention the games are completely different gameplay wise and even if the designs are similar they are also different enough to not be held liable for that stuff the law is very loose about that stuff, thats why their were so many off brand merch with just pikachu tail having a bit of brown and that was enough to make it legally distinct enough.. overall this is horrible decision by Nintendo heres hoping they lose.
Trademark and Copyright arn't the same. Trademark you have to defend. Copyright you don't.
Unless it is old enough to become public domain, in the US it typically takes 50 years for something to go public domain.
I don't think Palworld would count as a copyright violation. It doesn't outright copy any pokemon or pokemon assets and is mostly original in their design.
As per patenting game mechanics
Middle Earth Shadow of Mordor ,so warner bros , patented the Nemesis system
And then did fuckall with it
Bandai Namco had patented a software design. Their patent for “auxiliary games” during loading screens. The patent had finally expired in 2015.
Digital patents make copyright law look sane by comparison... WAYPOINTS were patented for over a decade, but the thing is IF nintendo wins this, they will end up getting sued 69 ways from Sunday for damages FAR greater than anything they could win... whats more, they will lose each suit. This would bring back a precedent that has basically been put to bed back in 2014. The only reason nintendo is now drowning in such lawsuits is because of that 2014 precedent.... God help gaming if we go back to random companies claiming to own the rights to basic concepts like FPS, or MMO, or MINIMAPS, or HP BARS.... with the full legal right sue anyone who does not license said concepts which they use.
People are sitting on these bogus patents without the legal precedent to actually act on them. So I kinda hope nintendo sets that precedent in the Japanese courts. I'll have you know I own the digital patent to the design of ~character identifiers located in close proximity to health indicators~, and ohhh boy Nintendo is in for a few 1000 lawsuits. I'm going to be rich lol
Oh come off it! Whats next?! Is Namco going to go after Nintendo since alot of gen 1 mons are "based" off of Dragon Quest mobs!?!!!? Personally, I'd like to see the end of the age old debate of Pokemon vs Digimon.
If Nintendo wins, they might go after games where you aim and throw objects with objects because this is one of their patented game mechanics.
Patents, trademarks and copyright continue to be a punchline in the digital era, regardless of where the court's located.
Copyright has no chance.
Pokemon exists in the same country as Digimon.
They would lose.
However if some insane process like how Sony patented microtransaction advertisement was infringed they got a better chance.
Next square Enix suing Nintendo for the same reason as Nintendo did.
I, fucking, Hope so.
The problem here is that this lawsuit was filed in Japanese courts which are notorious for putting down any case of "fair use". Even if the Pals had original or inspired designs, completely original code, etc, the courts can still just say "Oh, this is too similar to Pokemon so you lose". That doesn't exist in the US court system and that was one of my major concerns when I realized Pocketpair was a Japanese company.
They're facing an uphill court battle but I hope they stick it out and players support them through it.
Remember WB has patent on Nemesis system from Shadow of Mordor/War
What's the possibility of a connection to the timing between Akira Toriyama's death and Nintendo launching this lawsuit considering Nintendo is effectively guilty of the same bullshit as they ape'd off Toriyama's Dragon Quest for several pokemon?
Arch: they're going to sue palworld for copywriter.
Months later- Nintendo sues for patent rights.
Arch: See! My broad speculation was correct!!
This is like Blizzard suing every fantasy MMO for making a fantasy MMO. Its absurd. They got the greenlight to make the game because there are now over 1,000 different pokemon. They've gotten too diverse and now it's like Disney trying to sue someone because they had a mouse of any kind. Not to mention the fact that they got the green light before is most certainly going to be the first thing Palworld lawyers bring up. I can't think of a single thing that Pokemon does that isn't so generic that anyone could do it in their game and be fine, it's the total package that is their thing. And even then the simple addition of guns and the ability to not just kill but also EAT your Pal's makes Palworld more than distinct enough.
Nintendo had better hope they lose, because of they win, that would open the door for Atlus to sue the pants off of them and Game Freak, since Shin Megami Tensei did the whole "beat up and catch monsters and then make them fight for you" almost ten years before the first Pokemon games where even released.
After they lose, Nintendo should make some heads roll in their legal dependent, because those bastards are as litigious as DisnESG, and this is an optics disaster for them, especially if it's true and then word gets out that their own legal department signed off on each and every one of Pal World's creature designs.
Gonna be honest here.
If Nintendo wins this lawsuit, I will never buy another Nintendo product ever again, for as long as I continue to live.
I've collected Legend of Zelda and Pokémon products since the 1990s. They will never get another dime from me, and I will actively look for every little thing I can do as a consumer to damage their business in a legal sense.
This shit is anti-competitive to an extreme degree and *needs* to be punished, straight up.
Frankly, this lawsuit is making me strongly reconsider getting the next-gen Switch successor when it comes out.
The funny thing is about that is pocketpair isn’t worth defending knowing their stupid deal with KuSony. Also this is likely gets settled out of court and the whole thing is a nothing burger. People overreacting at its finest.
Wow. Such blows against the empire. I don't know how Nintendo will ever survive it.
@@rhindlethered ever hear of death by a thousand cuts? its rare for something large like a company to be given a oko. it starts with small chips and cracks then them neglecting said chips and cracks letting them get worse over time until the wall falls in. people talking and spreading word of foul deeds actually does do some damage, yes you can spin some bad pr into positive gta is proof of that. what nintendos doing? it can only be viewd negitively, theres no way they can spin it. which gives people more to talk about and spirals outward over time until their attention is diverted elsewhere. ninty REALLY doesnt want people paying attention to their patents... at least in the usa, alice like decisons might cause them severe headaches.
@@rhindlethered People like you are why we keep ending up with all our hobbies stolen from us. But go ahead, keep feeling OH SO SUPERIOR while taking it up the ass from these giant corpos going out of their way to monopolize the entire market.
good thing the palworld devs got the money to counter sue or fight back.
the only reason why nintendo is suing, because the game was a smashing success.
If anything expect a surge in Pal World sales after this news, people will rally to support the devs.
And it wouldn't if Pokemon was actually trying, but gamefreak got lazy Af.
@@johnj.spurgin7037 Nintendo literally be like: "spend money to make good game?" - "naw, sue everyone!"
I might start randomly gifting people copies here and there and hope others do the same .... No reason of course.. Just cause iys a good game
The sad thing is that palworld shouldn’t be defended based on their deal with KuSony.
Nintendo will never let a good thing happen with anything near their IPs if they can help it.
They fear potential competitors getting off the ground, whether indie or organized, and look down upon anything they don't own.
We learned this lesson a long, long time ago.
You make it sound like they sued A Hat in Time…
@@malcovich_games If it had done Palworld numbers, they might have tried.
@@GareWorks The fact is, they didn’t. I could be here all day listing competitor games they didn’t sue, if you have a minimum sales goalpost. How about Genshin Impact? Yokai Watch?
Anyway, I am challenging the OP’s assertion that Nintendo puts down their competitors for no good legal reason.
While many Palworld designs feel very much like they could have been from a Pokemon game and some even look kinda like direct parodies, I don't think the remblence is close enough for a realistic chance to win a copyright lawsuit. Nintendo probably thought suing over some patents might get the palworld creators entangled longer.
Apart from that they are not treated like direct parodies. You can't claim it is a parody while not making a parody of the source material. It sounds like a cope argument is you ask me.
Also it isn't a copyright lawsuit. They can't win a copyright lawsuit, but they can win a patent lawsuit as the designs do infringe on the patents Nintendo has on all pokemons. You can't just steal the design, look and spirit of Lucario and then change it a little. Just like you can't steal the design and look of a designer handbag or some Nike shoes and call it your own. Those handbags and shoes have patents on them. The design is patented. You can make handbags and sues. You just can't make them look like a specific brand of Nike shoes.
@@Cloud_Seeker Still, considering how trigger happy Nintendo usually is, I am fairly confident they would have filed a suit ages ago, if the designs were close enough to make a clear-cut case.
Nonetheless, it's probably up to the judges from now on.
@@Cloud_SeekerUou chose the worst example pal/mon to use.
How else do you depict anubis, the god of death from egyptian folklore than using a jackel adorned in egyptian jewelry?
@@lorddaro7771to add to my comment to the other guy.
This
Palworld hired lawyers to sit beside nintendo lawyers and go through the designs to ensure they werent doing infringement of copywright designs.
Theres some clear inspiration in some designs, yes, but this inspiration is due to the designs bearing the same sources, making it very hard to argue they were taken directly from nintendo.
Nintendo cant touch a copywright suit, and if they could, they would have done something in the 4 years it took to release the game (or 3 after sn initial trailer got popular.)
@@shirothefish9688 Maybe not exactly how Lucario is made.
You can't just take a dog and named it Anubis and get away by taking someone else design. Countless of other people have created their version of Anubis without stealing the look of Lucario. Your counter is not as good as you think it is.
Nintendo do not publish on PC/steam (As fare as I know) so Palworld might as well be a washing machine company as fare as customers go. Its a completely different category. This is what happens when a company refuses to sell to customers.
Palworld is not even close...
Arch failing to understand the difference between copyright and patents for 12 min
Let's not forget Nintendo started as a Yakuza racket and the Japanese are after all, VERY big on maintaining tradition.
Why now? Because next week is the release of the next Zelda game.
Nintendo does shady thing -> Controversy happens -> Zelda comes out and people forget about controversy and say how great Nintendo is
Nintendo are truly pathetic. I hope this stupid lawsuit is thrown out. It's funny how they haven't gone after the numerous other Pokemon clones - just the one that was actually successful. What a garbage company.
Apart from that they do have a case.
@@Cloud_Seeker No they don't, they're trying via patents and will obviously lose due to prior art existing, cope harder
@@Q2F2 Copyright has nothing to do with patents. Palworld might actually infringe on their patents. But that is for the courts to decide. If you are going to tell me that Anubis and Lucario do not look like each other. I will tell you to check your eyes.
Also. This video is garbage. Arch talks about statute of limitations, which is nonsense. Palworld is not even a year old, so statute of limitations do not play a part. Nintendo has more then 6-9 months to respond for obvious reasons.
The Arch mistakes copyright for trademark. Which are not the same. You can't lose your copyright. Not until you have been dead for 70-100 years or so. Trademark however must be defended. If you don't defend it for 3 consecutive years it is considered abandoned. Which obviously do not apply as Palworld has not even existed for 1 year yet. And we know Nintendo has defended its trade mark within the last 3 years.
@@Cloud_Seeker 'This isn't about copyright, also they obviously copied Pokemon check your eyes'
(Also I agree arch was wildly off base, but go off on that strawman dude)
@@Q2F2 I never said it was about copyright. Do you have an inability to read? This is a patent issue as Nintendo can not win in a copyright claim.
If the patents in question are what everyone has so far SAID they are for, there's several other pretty big developers / publishers who it directly and immediately benefits pumping money into this. I mean, I can't really see Bandai giving up rights to Digimon on the basis of, "we totally claim that we have patents on taming and making monsters fight."
You cannot "lose your copyright". You can lose your ability to sue in a specific instance if you let it go on for long enough, but that only allows that one instance.
You have no "duty" to protect it whatsoever. You only need to protect it to the level that *you* want. It is not like a trademark.
well, technically you can lose it… but only if you willingly sell it/sign it away, which you can do (and many people have… and regretted later. usually Work For Hire disputes, yada yada, etc).
in America at least, you also do not need to register a copyright to have ownership of it. you legally own the copyright to any work of art you make as soon as you make it. that being said, if someone does infringe upon your work, it’s going to be harder to prove that it is yours if you didn’t register it. luckily, copyright registration is simple and easy, and you can actually register all the works you made in a year at one time to save on the registration fee (you only pay when you register, it’s not based on how many things you register …. or at least that’s how it was a decade ago. i’ll admit, it’s been a long time since i left education and was teaching students how to do this stuff, so it’s possible things have changed with those specific regulations. so apologies to anyone if this info is no longer valid🤷♂️😅)
The game has been announced over 2 years ago and Nintendo had almost 3 years to scrutinize it for copyright infringement and they did nothing in that time. Now they are suing for patent infringement. If the word patent is correct and not a mistranslation, then the only possible thing Nintendo can be suing for are the pokeball lookalikes used in Palworld to capture the monsters.
They recently won a lawsuit with a chinese company that was making pokemon spoof games
So I guess they feel confident
I know of A game mechanic that has been patented, one wich is quite famous: the nemesis system from "middle earth: shadow of mordor/war". That system make certain orc officier stronger as they fight you and survive or kill you. This mechanic has never been done elsewhere in any other game since, BUUUUUUT the fact that it was never tried again mean that it was not challenge in court in front of a judge either so... gray zone?
another one wich i cant remember the name was during a game between level, some kind of mini-game during a loading segment to make the loading time less boring. It was patented decade ago and never challenged as to make sure everyone loading time would remain boring.
Nintendo are mistaken if they think this will turn out their favor:-
A)They waited for too long, they will claim it was to "investigate" but what it looks like is that they waited till the popularity if the game died down a bit in order to not anger too many people (they will come off as underhanded and scummy)
B)Ironically Nintendo is accused regularly of copying fan designs and using them in their games without compensating the fans, wonder how they will defend that 😅
C)There is zero chance of misteking Palworld for Pokemon, they are on two separate systems and different genres, and Nintendo doesn't own the concepts of capturing and training monsters or cute animal designs, also never sued Digimon, Monster Rancher or Temtem, they won't win this.
Also Arch, the deadly prank Israel pulled off was aganist the Lebanese Hezbollah group not Palestinians.
C: accoeding to tue patents they just filed, they actually do own that.
Which is fucking wild.
Monster rancher doesnt fall under that mechanic as you are raising them. Digimon doesnt for similar reasons, and tem tem i dont know enough of.
But theres also casette beasts.
Nintendo is flying really close to the sun here, and i hope their wings melt hard.
Looks like Nintendo and Pokemon already lost. So they won against a number of Chinese companies falsely believing momentum will carry them here and yet they filed a patent lawsuit.
I have a feeling Nintendo will lose this HARD.
They win copyright? Wtf are you talking about arch, they don't own the concept of capturing monsters. And if you say they look alike so palworld is in the wrong, then every military shooter should sue each other.
You don’t want Nintendo to win this, Nintendo is trying to claim they own the concept of monster collecting, it’s kinda like when react Bros tried to own the concept of reacting.
I personally think this is just a scare tactic suit to see if Pocketpair will willingly back down. Not sure if they're correct but many a lawyer has said that this would be a difficult suit for Nintendo to actually win, even given Japan's severe copywrite laws.
Frankly the game is more like ARK than Pokemon so my OPINION is, best case for Nintendo would be Pocketpair having to change some of the pals that are "a bit to close" to Pokemon.
The devs/publishers of Lord of the Rings: Shadow of War patented the nemesis system I believe. And naturally have failed to do anything with it after that game.
They want that off brand money lol.
If Nintendo dose win, It would be the best time for SE's time to strike with the same lawsuit due to the fact that a lot of the gen 1 pokemon where blatant rip-offs of Dragon Quest monsters.
For what i checked, people are saying that this is patents made in Pokemon Arceus, after Palworld creation. I don't have much details but i would love to see someone explore this.
Yeah, I would like to know what exactly was patented by Nintendo in this case tbh because the idea of patenting game mechanics just seems... so freaking strange.
@@NA-ud6qm Not even Palworld devs know which ones. It tells a lot.
If only the court of law could be decided by popular opinion, instead of simply whichever party has the most money. Imagine a world where the more well liked product had the strongest legal protections. Giant companies might actually have to please their customers to maintain their market domination, if that were the case.
And Palworld would beat Nintendo in a landslide.
In the case of 'owning' game mechanics, WOTC has claimed copyright (but not patent , I think) on the 'tap' mechanic (turning a card sideways to indicate activation and/or exhaustion of a card), which is tenous at best… but that’s probably a reason no other card games have used it and use other ways to handle similar functions.
No your honour we didn't rip of Pokemon...
we ripped off Digimon.
😂😂😂
A problem Palworld's devs have to deal with though is a court system full of old people who have no clue about gaming. Arguments such as how they are completely different genres of game or on different platforms will fly far over the heads of the people deciding if they're at fault or not.
Why should Pocketpair even care? Just counter-claim them in Chinese court, both sentences would be biased and equally worthless.
Pocket Pair is based in Japan
Pocketpair is a Japanese company, not Chinese.
@@AnotherGuyTheXone Correct, I was absolutely sure they were Chinese. My point is invalid and I am honestly baffled, Pocket Pair must have known their chances in Japan to defend this in court are low, as it's literal patent hellhole. I really wonder what's their plan.
If Nintendo could so easily win a copyright lawsuit against Pocketpair, they wouldve done it long before the game ever released.
Exactly. I do not know why Arch here thinks he is somehow way smarter than Nintendos' legal team and says he would sue for copyright.
Nintendo sit on a lot of patents like the direction cross for example. But they don't go to court and use them for flex most of the time. Palwold called the bluff and now Nintendo must go to court and risk loosing some patents recognition or give up and let everyone know those treats are empty.
If Nintendo wins the lawsuit I will never purchase any of their products ever again.
My grudges run deeper than the book of grudges it self.
Here's a crazy idea: How about just making a really good Pokemon game that blows away Palworld?
Because then you couldn't push out a cheap buggy low effort cash grab every year.
They're already blowing it, they don't really need to.
I'm doing Warhammer 40k Chatbots on Hi Waifu. You can make your own literary adventures. I expect one day GW will take me to court.
Anyone wondering the Hi Waifu account name is the same as my youtube account. I even did a Arch Warhammer bot.
Nintendo got no loss as the game is not on the Switch and is different to Pokemon.
Blizzard: Hey Nintendo, I have an idea you can use.
Ah yes, Nintendo caught people having fun without their underpowered shitbox again.
Ps5 shows that power is useless without good games.
*shitcube
Ooh we got an elitist over here.
Sound the alarm!
Its a casual system made incredibly small and sold for far less. Obviously its underpowered compared to others.
Doesnt make it worse as a console. Its objectively better as a handheld than other consoles (by default, but still a large win).
@@shirothefish9688 Look up the specs and compare them to a regular $350 midrange smartphone, that's not very elitist.
Some things just should not be allowed to be patented
just a reminder they could of dealt with Pocket pair years ago their both japanise company and both would know what the other is working on, and Pokemon only recently Patented the catch a mon thing as well as the other patent, this is clearly targeted.
Do you have a link to Gamefreak patenting the "Catch a mon"?
A really scummy move, considering the catch a monster thing was around before Pokémon itself, in multiple ways
IIRC, Koei Tecmo successfully patented the squad mechanics for their Dynasty Warriors games, some years ago.
The only way for this to be a patent case is if it used patented code.
Gameplay, mechanics, and asthetics can not be patented.
Pretty sure the is legal precedent against attempted patenting of game mechanics.
Interesting... But how can that be the case? Pokemon Arceus is the only game I can think of as an example that could have been copied and the two games are sold on completely separate platforms.
@@NA-ud6qmthese days consoles use basically the same programming languages as PCs so it's not impossible.
Nintendo has also outsourced some of their development to chinese companies.
But I doubt that's the line they are taking with this.
Reminds me of that time SpiffingBrit played that "Game Developer Simulator" but instead of making games, he just hired a bunch of lawyers.
If they win, Nitendo basically own the genre. I doubt they actually will win, especially with that patent bs
what genre? palworld is not the same game genre as pokemon
@@nathanperquin9910monster capturing and fighting genre
@@shirothefish9688 Which Palworld does not belong to.
most of the copyright claims have already been debunked