VGEsoterica
Member
Looked for a thread, didnt find one, but search function is kinda ass so if there is one...merge it? lol
Coming from a background in entertainment business law / patent law (design and physical object) the three patents Nintendo has referenced are so HILARIOUSLY vague it could literally affect a couple thousand games made that pre-date the patent filing. A real "prior art" situation where you have to wonder...what in the shit is Nintendo doing here? Are they just mad Palworld is eating their lunch and now that Sony is involved they see it as a direct attack? Obv they want that court injunction to stop distribution of Palworld...and MAYBE they'd get it in Japan, but any other developed nations court system would probably not even allow that case to see the inside of a court room.
Literally one patent talks in vague abstracts about tires in a racing game....what??
I think Nintendo has 100% lost the plot on this one...but it was fun to break it down since I've been following it since day 1
Coming from a background in entertainment business law / patent law (design and physical object) the three patents Nintendo has referenced are so HILARIOUSLY vague it could literally affect a couple thousand games made that pre-date the patent filing. A real "prior art" situation where you have to wonder...what in the shit is Nintendo doing here? Are they just mad Palworld is eating their lunch and now that Sony is involved they see it as a direct attack? Obv they want that court injunction to stop distribution of Palworld...and MAYBE they'd get it in Japan, but any other developed nations court system would probably not even allow that case to see the inside of a court room.
Literally one patent talks in vague abstracts about tires in a racing game....what??
I think Nintendo has 100% lost the plot on this one...but it was fun to break it down since I've been following it since day 1