Support NeoGAF

[hemo memo]

I'm actually surprised it took Nintendo this long.

 

[Skifi28]

Good luck when you literally stole models and designs. lol

Literally?

 

[Synastry]

Good and I hope they win Nintendo gets away with alot of shit.

Releasing under power hardware.
Suing YT video creators if they dare say the word Nintendo.

The list goes on.

 

[Majukun]

i guess it will all depends on what kind of patents have been infringed.

while you can't generally copyright game mechanics and stuff, extremely specific ones are actually a-ok, like the nemesys system

 

[Elios83]

According to reports, it is probably about catching with the Pokéball or, in this case, the Pallsphere. However, other reports mention several patents. Someone in the other thread posted this a few hours ago.

Whether this is ultimately a violation will have to be decided by judges and not by the forum.

If that's the issue they can make some other container or a backpack.
But it seems like total legal bullshit to bully the smaller company to settle to avoid a long legal battle they can't finance.
Hopefully Nintendo loses if that's their strategy.

 

[Insanemaelstrom]

Because he was very vocal in how it "only" cost under $7mil to make, to cultivate this image that he's not part of the big boys that people are buying into. Despite millions of dollars and careers at multinational banks being well beyond most of the world.

He also said that he basically used up all the money he earned from his previous game, "craftopia". Which according to vgchartz has earned around 10mil

Video Game Insights – Games industry data and analysis

VG Insights is for developers, publishers and anyone interested in video game market research. Providing 50+ datapoints per game for over 50,000 games!

vginsights.com

So basically a guy who had a good hit on his first game and instead of wasting it, chose to invest in a new game, taking a big risk, which got his great result.

All in all, an even more motivational story.

 

[poppabk]

If that's the issue they can make some other container or a backpack.
But it seems like total legal bullshit to bully the smaller company to settle to avoid a long legal battle they can't finance.
Hopefully Nintendo loses if that's their strategy.

They could have done that from the outset but they wanted to make the parallels clear - they had to know they were flying close to the sun on this one, hopefully they did their due dilligence.

 

[ShaiKhulud1989]

because Palworld not only rips off Pokemon's general concept

It's whole another game genre

smugly taking their look and style for use in the same kind of product

It's not against the law, just ask porn parody industry

I personally don't hate or love Palworld, but I hate Nintendo for stomping all over fair use and basic content creation rights with threars of simple insolvability to the company or person. Nintendo started as a company who sold Hanafuda cards to Yakuza and it's funny that outside their family-friendly facade they are actually still running around with Yakuza practices.

Reminds me of Disney a bit.

 

[Natsuko]

If that's the issue they can make some other container or a backpack.
But it seems like total legal bullshit to bully the smaller company to settle to avoid a long legal battle they can't finance.
Hopefully Nintendo loses if that's their strategy.

Well, just because a company is smaller doesn't mean it should enjoy protection and be allowed to infringe patents or copyright.

I am not surprised that this happened. My children thought it was a new Pokémon because it's very close to Pokémon. It's not just one of the umpteen catch some monster games. I've always questioned whether that's not a bit too much of a similarity.

 

[Hookshot]

He also said that he basically used up all the money he earned from his previous game, "craftopia".

Well I can't find a budget for that one, only more plagiarism stories so he might have been a poor downtrodden person after all.

 

[Elios83]

Well, just because a company is smaller doesn't mean it should enjoy protection and be allowed to infringe patents or copyright.

I am not surprised that this happened. My children thought it was a new Pokémon because it's very close to Pokémon. It's not just one of the umpteen catch some monster games. I've always questioned whether that's not a bit too much of a similarity.

You're assuming they have actually infringed anything at all.

 

[Topher]

Good luck when you literally stole models and designs. lol

Yeah.....about that....

exhibit A, your honor

 

[Guilty_AI]

Good luck when you literally stole models and designs. lol

Patent. This isn't about the designs but about some mechanic.

 

[ShaiKhulud1989]

You're assuming they have actually infringed anything at all.

You can sue almost every bestseller while skimming through Nintendo's patents. Some of them are:
- Fast travel
- Friendly summon mechanics
- Transportation summon mechanic
- Building stuff with replacable joints
- Openworld games with monsters
- Physics that reacts to more than two characters on screen simultaneously

That's a whole can of worms nobody wants to open wor Nintendo's own sake.

 

[BlackTron]

It's whole another game genre

It's not against the law, just ask porn parody industry

I personally don't hate or love Palworld, but I hate Nintendo for stomping all over fair use and basic content creation rights with threars of simple insolvability to the company or person. Nintendo started as a company who sold Hanafuda cards to Yakuza and it's funny that outside their family-friendly facade they are actually still running around with Yakuza practices.

Reminds me of Disney a bit.

Grafting in Satisfactory doesn't mean it's not a monster collecting RPG anymore.

I said "same type of product". Porn parody is the same type of product as the source its ripped from? Parody is protected, ask Weird Al. Parodies getting away with it doesn't prove you can on every circumstance.

McDonalds can shut down a burger joint called McDonalds but not "McDonald & Sons" machine shop. This is the relevance of being the "same type of product".

 

[ShaiKhulud1989]

Parody is protected, ask Weird Al.

Or not. Ask Nintendo lawyers.

 

[BlackTron]

Patent. This isn't about the designs but about some mechanic.

It's what is currently known to be their legal tactic. That isn't confirmation of what infringements they believe are valid or all the avenues they would take.

 

[BlackTron]

Or not. Ask Nintendo lawyers.

This gets into the question of whether Palworld is a parody or simply a ripoff. To me, it does not appear to fall under the intention of parody protection. But you get a different judge every time.

 

[gakidx]

Yeah.....about that....

Man I just love Dragon Quest so much

 

[Topher]

Even Jez Corden is making sense about this...

 

[Guilty_AI]

It's what is currently known to be their legal tactic. That isn't confirmation of what infringements they believe are valid or all the avenues they would take.

the fact they have to resort to a legal tactic shows nintendo lawyers thought suing over the designs wouldn't be as certain as some here believe.

 

[MagnesD3]

Nintendo winning this is horrible for devs, really hate big corps bullying smaller companies. Gotta throw off the nostalgia goggles when it comes to nintendo because they are just as evil as any other corp.

 

[BlackTron]

Yeah.....about that....

Already went over this in the other thread yesterday so I'm gonna be brief.

Nintendo didn't copy anything infringing from Dragon Quest, but Palword did cross the line. Because they coped trade dress, and Nintendo did not.

The law is very specific about what trade dress is, its purpose, importance and what can and can't be enforced.

 

[Guilty_AI]

Nintendo winning this is horrible for devs, really hate big corps bullying smaller companies.

unfortunately suing over game mechanics is less unusual than we think. The results of such cases tend to vary tho.

 

[ahtlas7]

Awesome

 

[Topher]

Already went over this in the other thread yesterday so I'm gonna be brief.

Nintendo didn't copy anything infringing from Dragon Quest, but Palword did cross the line. Because they coped trade dress, and Nintendo did not.

The law is very specific about what trade dress is, its purpose, importance and what can and can't be enforced.

Doesn't matter. As Guilty_AI pointed out, this is about a patented game mechanic, not designs as I and others assumed. Patenting game mechanics should not be a thing, imo. Lawsuits derived from them should be thrown out. This could have significant consequences.

 

[BlackTron]

the fact they have to resort to a legal tactic shows nintendo lawyers thought suing over the designs wouldn't be as certain as some here believe.

If you say so. It actually does come down to the subjectivity of the judge, but the case is 100% there. If they think they have something that is more objective and less risky, they will use it first. That's just how lawsuits work. The lawyers get together and trade ideas on the best most direct way to get them.

 

[BlackTron]

Doesn't matter. As Guilty_AI pointed out, this is about a patented game mechanic, not designs as I and others assumed. Patenting game mechanics should not be a thing, imo. Lawsuits derived from them should be thrown out. This could have significant consequences.

I doubt Nintendo would use this patent on a dev that simply had a ball throwing mechanic in a game. It's not like it's "just that" they're mad about. It's simply the weapon they are using on their enemy.

They got Al Capone with tax evasion.

 

[Topher]

I doubt Nintendo would use this patent on a dev that simply had a ball throwing mechanic in a game. It's not like it's "just that" they're mad about. It's simply the weapon they are using on their enemy.

They got Al Capone with tax evasion.

I wouldn't put it past Nintendo, but we will see

 

[Guilty_AI]

I doubt Nintendo would use this patent on a dev that simply had a ball throwing mechanic in a game. It's not like it's "just that" they're mad about. It's simply the weapon they are using on their enemy.

They got Al Capone with tax evasion.

It also makes them extremely scummy since it makes it seem like a blatant attempt to curb potential competition, same for whoever supports them on this.

 

[Saber]

Mad respect and good luck. You gonna need it.

 

[BlackTron]

It also makes them extremely scummy since it makes it seem like a blatant attempt to curb potential competition, same for whoever supports them on this.

I mean, Palword looked scummy first by taking Nintendo's design.

There are myriad monster collecting games, some are even on Switch, many are not shy about where their inspirations came from. Why isn't Nintendo curbing competition there? If not suing them, at least keeping them off Nintendo platforms? Palworld crossed both a moral and legal line.

 

[LordOcidax]

Now that's one carefully crafted, even strategized, response - it won't have any impact on Nintendo but may help sway more public opinion to their side.

Lol, in the real world nobody cares about this. This is not a presidential election

 

[Topher]

I mean, Palword looked scummy first by taking Nintendo's design.

There are myriad monster collecting games, some are even on Switch, many are not shy about where their inspirations came from. Why isn't Nintendo curbing competition there? If not suing them, at least keeping them off Nintendo platforms? Palworld crossed both a moral and legal line.

How do you know what legal line was crossed without knowing the details of the lawsuit?

Lol, in the real world nobody cares about this. This is not a presidential election

The gaming world cares about this.

 

[Fabieter]

Just change the rip off pal designs and you are good to go. That has nothing to do with your creative vision.

 

[Go_Ly_Dow]

 

[hinch7]

Just change the rip off pal designs and you are good to go. That has nothing to do with your creative vision.

Its not that. They are suing for patent infringement which are some of the game mechanics. Which is even worse.

They're only doing this so they can put them and their competition under. If you can call them that. And sending a message.

 

[LordOcidax]

The gaming world cares about this.

Gaming forums and reddit users, witch is like the 1% gaming user base… And our opinion have 0% impact in court.

 

[Angry_Megalodon]

I mean, Palword looked scummy first by taking Nintendo's design.

Palworld crossed both a moral and legal line.

"moral line", dude wtf is even this, lol.

The same line that BOTW crossed by copy-pasting the open-world mechanics of Ubisoft? The artworks ripped from King Kong? Naming an alien "RIDLEY" in Metroid? Ripping Peter Pan's design for Link? The list could go on and on.

Nintendo should be the last one to talk about plagiarism.


The idea of patenting game mechanics is as deranged as patenting ideas or concepts for a book or movie. Insanity.

 

[HogIsland]

Its not that. They are suing for patent infringement which are some of the game mechanics. Which is even worse.

They're only doing this so they can put them and their competition under. If you can call them that. And sending a message.

unless nintendo literally has a patent on catching monsters in a ball, I doubt they can actually make a patent infringement argument. imo this is lawfare by nintendo intended to skate on general tech confusion and also bleed pocketpair. their approach to the YUZU lawsuit was similar.

 

[Topher]

Gaming forums and reddit users, witch is like the 1% gaming user base… And our opinion have 0% impact in court.

Didn't say these opinions would have any impact in court. But if that is the point you were making then ok.

 

[Guilty_AI]

I mean, Palword looked scummy first by taking Nintendo's design.

So did nintendo as show with the dragon quest designs, yet you seem fine with that.

There are myriad monster collecting games, some are even on Switch, many are not shy about where their inspirations came from. Why isn't Nintendo curbing competition there?

Because Palworld, unlike those, has potential to become a threat to their monopoly on this particular market. Especially considering Sony decided to back them up.

Palworld crossed both a moral and legal line.

"moral" lmao

 

[BlackTron]

How do you know what legal line was crossed without knowing the details of the lawsuit?

I doubt Nintendo would use this patent on a dev that simply had a ball throwing mechanic in a game. It's not like it's "just that" they're mad about. It's simply the weapon they are using on their enemy.

They got Al Capone with tax evasion.

If you say so. It actually does come down to the subjectivity of the judge, but the case is 100% there. If they think they have something that is more objective and less risky, they will use it first. That's just how lawsuits work. The lawyers get together and trade ideas on the best most direct way to get them.

If I were in Nintendo's shoes -I'd be pissed about taking trade dress (that's the moral and legal line crossed) but my first tactic might be any patents I already had on you first. Even if I don't give a shit about the patent.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Fight the Nintendo Power!

 

[peronmls]

Creative or unoriginality? But still. It’s like trying to sue Digimon.

 

[midnightAI]

Heh, even though I am an indie myself, I have to laugh at the 'not discouraged from pursuing their creative ideas' when talking about Palworld

 

[Topher]

If I were in Nintendo's shoes -I'd be pissed about taking trade dress (that's the moral and legal line crossed) but my first tactic might be any patents I already had on you first. Even if I don't give a shit about the patent.

Are you a lawyer?

 

[Robb]

The idea of patenting game mechanics is as deranged as patenting ideas or concepts for a book or movie. Insanity.

I hope it goes like this:

 

[BlackTron]

"moral line", dude wtf is even this, lol.

This is really hard for some people. The line is taking trade dress. If you make a burger joint and add arches with the exact curve of McDonald's, you stole trade dress. And it's obvious you did it on purpose, for your benefit and the dilution of the other property. The characters designs blatantly steal Pokemon's trade dress (whereas Nintendo did not steal it from Dragon Quest, even when superficially similar monsters were used. They have their own style, you can tell on sight which game they came from).

 

[intheinbetween]

I should read what patent means in french then. The gameplay is nothing like Pokemon as far as I know?

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I understood the lawsuit aimed at the pokeball-like system