Fr, in order to have a case they would need to prove more than just identical concept, but overlapping characters entirely. On top of that, the parody defense is pretty solid.
Copyright suits generally only proceed if there is a reasonable expectation that the opponent attempted to steal your likeness for profit, to confuse the customer into conflating the two brands.
HOWEVER, this lawsuit isn’t in the USA or Europe. It’s in Japan.
This isn’t a copyright suit. The Pal/Pokemon resemblance isn’t a part of this at all.
This is a patent infringement lawsuit. Which is even more confusing since I’m not sure what Pokemon would have a patent on mechanically, that hasn’t been done before, or since, without them defending previously.
AFAIK this is only a thing in the US? In many jurisdictions you are not beholden to actively defending your patent or you might lose it. You’re just required to pay the fees to uphold it, and well, if you want to drag someone to court you might have some extra hoops to jump through (for example over here you need to prove it was used in an intentional manner and to generate profit).
There are actually a lot of patents in the video games industry. Idk how often they are actually enforced but two examples I know are that EA had a patent on loading screen mini games and I believe Monolith has a patent on the nemesis system they made for Shadow of Morder and Shadow of War. So there’s a chance they stumbled into some patent Nintendo has and they’re using that as a way to get rid of Palworld since they decided going for copyright infringement wasn’t gonna work.
Outside of a passing similarity to Pokemon, I wonder what the suit is about
It’s about Nintendo and their rabid legal practices.
Fr, in order to have a case they would need to prove more than just identical concept, but overlapping characters entirely. On top of that, the parody defense is pretty solid.
Copyright suits generally only proceed if there is a reasonable expectation that the opponent attempted to steal your likeness for profit, to confuse the customer into conflating the two brands.
HOWEVER, this lawsuit isn’t in the USA or Europe. It’s in Japan.
This isn’t a copyright suit. The Pal/Pokemon resemblance isn’t a part of this at all.
This is a patent infringement lawsuit. Which is even more confusing since I’m not sure what Pokemon would have a patent on mechanically, that hasn’t been done before, or since, without them defending previously.
AFAIK this is only a thing in the US? In many jurisdictions you are not beholden to actively defending your patent or you might lose it. You’re just required to pay the fees to uphold it, and well, if you want to drag someone to court you might have some extra hoops to jump through (for example over here you need to prove it was used in an intentional manner and to generate profit).
There are actually a lot of patents in the video games industry. Idk how often they are actually enforced but two examples I know are that EA had a patent on loading screen mini games and I believe Monolith has a patent on the nemesis system they made for Shadow of Morder and Shadow of War. So there’s a chance they stumbled into some patent Nintendo has and they’re using that as a way to get rid of Palworld since they decided going for copyright infringement wasn’t gonna work.
If only they would use the god dam nemesis system in other games! It is too cool to just die with those 2 games.
Some do. In Warframe you can get a specific type of enemy tailored to the player, who then steals your loot and mocks you.
I read them in another thread, game mechanic patents are some deep magic of copyright law. No sane person would dream up that madness.