Support NeoGAF

[SF Kosmo]

Who decides in a look and feel case?

Sure, but the outcome is probably easier to predict because the fundamentals wouldn't favor Nintendo. They would have to argue that Palworld is creating genuine brand confusion in the marketplace, and I just don't think that case is there.

If you go on the mobile marketplace, and look at all the Toca Boca or Minecraft clones that are like "Toka City Boka Life" or "MineCreate" that are literally just designed to trick children looking for a different game, THAT is what a "look and feel" case is. Palworld is just way outside of that and there's a reason Nintendo isn't trying to prosecute the case that way.

With a patent though, it's a lot harder to predict the outcome and there isn't a ton of precedent when it comes to enforcing gameplay patents.

 

[hyperbertha]

Its completely needless. Palworld isn't a threat to them.
They're effectively a gaming monolith taking on a couple of guys in a basement. Yeah they "copied" Pokemon's aesthetic, but then they put it in a game that is fundamentally different to pokemon in every meaningful way other than its monster designs. Nintendo do not own the concept of "cute evolving monsters", otherwise Digimon couldn't exist. They don't own the concept of monster-catcher RPGs, because they aren't even the first. They don't own turn-based RPGs or open world monster-catcher RPGs.

It remains to be seen if there are any code violations; me thinks that given this is patent related and not copywrite means that this is unlikely. Nintendo are claiming ownership to a certain patentable concept, which should get pushback and should get thrown in the trashcan.

Its scummy, because it shows how insanely insecure Nintendo are, over one of the most successful properties in the history of man. How about give the money they're burning on legal fees and shunt that into a hiring round at Gamefreak, and maybe make a good fucking Pokemon game, instead.

Palworld is a threat to them. It can majorly eat into their Pokemon sales. Look at how many are saying it's a better Pokemon.

 

[SF Kosmo]

It’s not because of the game play

It is, man. It's a patent case. It's literally about mechanics.

We don't know which ones yet because they haven't specified, even Pocketpair doesn't know yet, but it is gameplay based.

 

[BlackTron]

Sure, but the outcome is probably easier to predict because the fundamentals wouldn't favor Nintendo. They would have to argue that Palworld is creating genuine brand confusion in the marketplace, and I just don't think that case is there.

If you go on the mobile marketplace, and look at all the Toca Boca or Minecraft clones that are like "Toka City Boka Life" or "MineCreate" that are literally just designed to trick children looking for a different game, THAT is what a "look and feel" case is. Palworld is just way outside of that and there's a reason Nintendo isn't trying to prosecute the case that way.

With a patent though, it's a lot harder to predict the outcome and there isn't a ton of precedent when it comes to enforcing gameplay patents.

Are you sure about that? Your thoughts would be interesting. https://www.neogaf.com/threads/palw...g-their-creative-ideas.1675159/post-269587986

"Trade dress can be protected only if the owner of the trade dress can show the average consumer would be confused as to the origin of a product if another product appears in the same or similar packaging."

Maybe we have a situation where as a digital design in a game it would be scrutinized differently based on the context of said game's place and (potential/alleged) confusion in the marketplace than if said design were, say, on a tangible item like a trading card or action figure that is sold at retail?

 

[Clear]

The Pokemon company' patent list is here

Most of them seem really flimsy to me, like really flimsy. With most of them filed within the last 3 years, meaning that they wont have been contested in court. Very few of them actual seem to be about what you might think they're about, and not having played much of either game, I have no idea how close they are.

I still think its fundamentally about look and feel.

 

[Paulistano]

If patent rights are a thing Nintendo should pay ubisoft for the ideas they use to make breath of the wild.

 

[SF Kosmo]

Are you sure about that? Your thoughts would be interesting. https://www.neogaf.com/threads/palw...g-their-creative-ideas.1675159/post-269587986

"Trade dress can be protected only if the owner of the trade dress can show the average consumer would be confused as to the origin of a product if another product appears in the same or similar packaging."

Maybe we have a situation where as a digital design in a game it would be scrutinized differently based on the context of said game's place and (potential/alleged) confusion in the marketplace than if said design were, say, on a tangible item like a trading card or action figure that is sold at retail?

I don't really understand how you think what you quoted disagrees with me.

Trade dress is like people making fake Louis Vuitton bags with a similar print, or cheap mobile clones that are barely distinguishable. It isn't just broadly similar games with obvious influences. Those sorts of cases have been tried before but the precedent is very much in Palworld's favor.

Read more here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capcom_U.S.A._Inc._v._Data_East_Corp.

It's also clear Nintendo agrees, because they aren't suing over trademark or copyright, they're suing over patents.

 

[nordique]

It is, man. It's a patent case. It's literally about mechanics.

We don't know which ones yet because they haven't specified, even Pocketpair doesn't know yet, but it is gameplay based.

I stand corrected about that point - thanks

But I do still completely understand why Nintendo is going after them. How they choose to is whatever their legal team decides is the best way. With respect to the designs, they are pretty egregious to the point where one wonders if the Palworld devs had any designs they created outside of photoshop. If the method Nintendo’s legal team has chosen is go beat them by going after patents so be it. I’m not a lawyer so I have no comment on if that’s the best approach in a court of law.

 

[DJ12]

The Pokemon company' patent list is here

Most of them seem really flimsy to me, like really flimsy. With most of them filed within the last 3 years, meaning that they wont have been contested in court. Very few of them actual seem to be about what you might think they're about, and not having played much of either game, I have no idea how close they are.

I still think its fundamentally about look and feel.

Apple patented a rectangle with rounded corners, despite the LG Prada already existing which was a rectangle shape with rounded corners. If you get a bent judge on the take in a favourable country, you can win anything no matter how flimsy.

 

[BlackTron]

I don't really understand how you think what you quoted disagrees with me.

Trade dress is like people making fake Louis Vuitton bags with a similar print, or cheap mobile clones that are barely distinguishable. It isn't just broadly similar games with obvious influences. Those sorts of cases have been tried before but the precedent is very much in Palworld's favor.

Read more here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capcom_U.S.A._Inc._v._Data_East_Corp.

It's also clear Nintendo agrees, because they aren't suing over trademark or copyright, they're suing over patents.

Can I ask if you read my linked post before replying here? Because it's pretty massively apparent my contention is NOT that Palword's problem is being a "broadly similar game with obvious influences". I wasn't even necessarily "disagreeing", just continuing the conversation and asking your opinion.

Trade dress can absolutely apply to games. You nailed it when you said bags "with a similar print".

Tetris Holding v. Xio Interactive is an example where a developer successfully protected its brand through trade dress.[10] The owners of the Tetris game asserted trade dress rights for their “brightly-colored Tetriminos, which are formed by four equally-sized, delineated blocks, and the long vertical rectangle playfield, which is higher than wide.”[11] Although the defendant argued that these features were functional, the court found a valid trade dress because the color and style of the pieces were not related to the reason the game works, protecting the elements would not thwart competition, and there was an unlimited number of ways to design the game that would not affect the cost or quality.[12]

Capcom tried to use copyright and failed. Ok?

Edit: Just to make the connection between the Tetris example and Palworld. The color/style/texture of design elements on the Pals such as eyes (copied!), lines, edges, facial features, proportions, appendages etc is simply Pokemon style. A court might find this infringing, and unnecessary to make a competing game (there are infinite ways to design monsters without taking Nintendo's design elements, just as you don't need to copy the color/look/style/proportion of a tetrimino to make a Tetris clone).

 

[Clear]

Apple patented a rectangle with rounded corners, despite the LG Prada already existing which was a rectangle shape with rounded corners. If you get a bent judge on the take in a favourable country, you can win anything no matter how flimsy.

That's the definition of "look and feel" protection though. And frankly Palworld looks way too pretty to be a Pokemon game, I don't think there's much risk of confusion!

 

[Miyazaki’s Slave]

Nintendo will win...then in a show of mercy they will allow pal world on the switch 2 at a 80%(NOJ)10%(MS)10%(Pal World Devs) rev split.

Nintendo is harsh, but always fair.

 

[Komatsu]

With a patent though, it's a lot harder to predict the outcome and there isn't a ton of precedent when it comes to enforcing gameplay patents.

You are absolutely correct, but I think Nintendo will have a hard time in court with most of their Pokemon patents. As Clear posted earlier:

The Pokemon company' patent list is here

I've gone through them and a savvy defense team experienced with IP and patent law will make mincemeat of most what they filed for in the last 3 years. Some of these are almost textbook examples of frivolous patent trolling. This coming from a company that is infamous for inflicting frivolous "JP Morgan" lawsuits on many smaller devs, hoping to squeeze out of the market by inflicting ruinous legal costs on the opposition on often the most spurious grounds.

 

[BennyBlanco]

Can you make with a PlayStation logo?

 

[I Love Rock 'n' Roll]

Nintendo has no life... and Nintendo is both against the devs and the gamers confirmed! What a retarded firm!
Imagine SEGA suing everyone, Nintendo included, for using what have created with Sonic, Virtua Fighter and VIrtua Racing... Nintendo fucking sucks!

 

[GigaBowser]

 

[bender]

Should have used this:

 

[BacklashWave534]

If I were the palworld devs, I would shit my pants. No matter if it doesn't make sense, Nintendo typically wins.

Nintendo is a bully that typically goes after people who can't afford a legal defense. You will never see them take on a company that is bigger then them. I would love to see them try this shit with a company as big as Apple (who now allows Nintendo emulators) instead of random devs building an emulator, people hosting 40-year old rom sites that Nintendo intends never to sell again, fan content, or people making Pokemon look alikes. The truth is that that thier CEO is a sackless disgrace of a man.

 

[SF Kosmo]

You are absolutely correct, but I think Nintendo will have a hard time in court with most of their Pokemon patents. As Clear posted earlier:



I've gone through them and a savvy defense team experienced with IP and patent law will make mincemeat of most what they filed for in the last 3 years. Some of these are almost textbook examples of frivolous patent trolling. This coming from a company that is infamous for inflicting frivolous "JP Morgan" lawsuits on many smaller devs, hoping to squeeze out of the market by inflicting ruinous legal costs on the opposition on often the most spurious grounds.

Oh wow, that's useful insight and yeah it's tough to see how any of these would even apply to Palworld and most of them seem difficult to actually enforce in any circumstance.

Yeah I think this is stroll suit designed to waste their time and money and maybe force a settlement that would either strengthen their IP or come with some strings attached unrelated to the substance of the suit.

Basically, "we'll let you off cheap if you agree to x, y, and z changes even though those changes aren't connected to the patents we're suing over."

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

If the Pocket Pair legal team is savvy, they will not only win but strike this BS patent filing which goes against longstanding intellectual property law. It is settled in law that game rules cannot be copyrighted. This has happened many times, every once in a while some bullshit filing goes through and it is later challenged in court. A Patent is a registered right that gives the owner exclusive right to features and processes of inventions so unless Nintendo can prove that the whole system is an "invention" (good luck), the defendant can allege that said rules are not patentable and are matter of copyright, which, voilá!, cannot cover game rules.

Why do you keep bringing up copyright when this is a patent lawsuit? If you think game rules can't be copyrighted, that's probably why they filed for a patent instead.

AFAIK, code that represents an implementation of systems and rules that form something resembling an mechanization, can be patented. And in gaming, Namco did exactly that back in 1995 when they patented their mini-game loading feature. The "invention" in that case, was the process where they embedded game code of titles not dependent on the parent game's code, to then have the embedded game code function as its own game during a loading screen. That patent expired in 2015, but it does go to show that patenting systems as expressions of rules defined through bodies of code is a thing, even in gaming.

I was also going to bring up IBM's patent of their BIOS, but I did a little looking and turns out that was a copyright. So they copyrighted code that was an expression of rules pertaining to the function of hardware in their PC spec, and did so successfully. What I'm getting at is, you can likely secure legal protection for game rules in any sense if you wanted, so long as you can demonstrate those rules are defined robustly enough through expression of code that represents some type of "system" or mechanization representative of a system. Whether you then do it as a copyright or patent is up to the filer's preference.

 

[adamsapple]

Looks like the ramifications are already taking place.

Palworld has been taken off of Sony's TGS lineup. Might cause a delay in release too.


Before:

After:

 

[Reizo Ryuu]

Edit: Just to make the connection between the Tetris example and Palworld. The color/style/texture of design elements on the Pals such as eyes (copied!), lines, edges, facial features, proportions, appendages etc is simply Pokemon style. A court might find this infringing, and unnecessary to make a competing game (there are infinite ways to design monsters without taking Nintendo's design elements, just as you don't need to copy the color/look/style/proportion of a tetrimino to make a Tetris clone).

Just to reiterate what I mentioned earlier, trade dress doesn't apply here since you're describing artist style, tetris are just primitive shapes made out of squares and could much easier have trade dress apply to it if thoroughly specifc in its description.
Pokemon doesn't even have a set style, almost every game has a slightly different art style and all pokémon cards are illustrated by different artists in different styles which all simply originate from manga/anime art styles in general.

 

[BlackTron]

Just to reiterate what I mentioned earlier, trade dress doesn't apply here since you're describing artist style, tetris are just primitive shapes made out of squares and could much easier have trade dress apply to it if thoroughly specifc in its description.
Pokemon doesn't even have a set style, almost every game has a slightly different art style and all pokémon cards are illustrated by different artists in different styles which all simply originate from manga/anime art styles in general.

Trade dress doesn't require description in advance...you can try and use it at any time just in reaction to it being (allegedly) violated. It would need to pass a few tests to prove, one of which being that it had "acquired distinctiveness", that is, a familiarity with customers over time that they associate with the brand. The court would not likely think a white line at the bottom of the screen is protected because it would never be associated with the brand. In this case, they decided that the color, pixel width, etc of the tetriminos might create a confusing association with the other product. The other test is that it can't be functional -you have to be able to make it your own way. Since it's very easy to make a L in a different style/shape/color etc, they lost. Even though they used the "functional defense".

Since trade dress refers to the "look/feel" that customers associate with the brand and includes include colors and shapes, just gonna drop this for the last time:

 

[Reizo Ryuu]

Trade dress doesn't require description in advance...

I didn't say in advance, I said it needs to be highly specific in its description, which tetris primitive shapes can be, the "pokémon eye" example isn't even one set of highly specific eyes they use throughout pokémon, and nearly all of them can be found in one form or another in manga in general; heck some pokémon straight up have "human" looking eyes, which just brings it back to artist style and makes trade dress completely inapplicable.

 

[Kataploom]

If patent rights are a thing Nintendo should pay ubisoft for the ideas they use to make breath of the wild.

Let's not start with "who invented first" because then almost every dev making 3rd person 3D game should pay Nintendo for the camera/navigation system lol, everyone owes something to Nintendo, even the most basic things like current control layout

 

[Gexxy1]

The patent Nintendo is allegedly suing Palworld over was created after Palworld had already been out for months.

 

[zapper]

The patent Nintendo is allegedly suing Palworld over was created after Palworld had already been out for months.

apparently the Japanese one is from 2021

stupid choice by nintendo imo, at this point i also believe that the rumours that they had ordered their partners not to talk about palworld were true. not "nice"

 

[Lunarorbit]

exhibit A, your honor

Whoa. Seriously.

I played the dragon warriors on nes and was never super into the dragon ball aesthetic So I missed lots of the Japanese concept/art work. Great call on this

 

[Rentahamster]

Someone needs to make machinima of Phoenix Write defending Pocketpair against Nintendo, and then when all hope is lost, Punished Edgeworth comes in at the last minute, representing Square Enix's long lost suit against Nintendo for copyright infringement of Dragon Quest.

 

[BacklashWave534]

Patent infringement? That's not where I thought a lawsuit would go...

Maybe it's over the monster in a ball capture mechanic?

That's like square suing all jrpg devs over turn based combat. Nintendo needs to be put in thier place.

 

[grvg]

It would be hilarious if the palworld devs won and destroyed Nintendo's undefeated reputation

 

[cireza]

Looks like the ramifications are already taking place.

Palworld has been taken off of Sony's TGS lineup. Might cause a delay in release too.

I simply don't understand how members of the leadership of Xbox (who have been trying for several years to keep good relations with Nintendo because they want to push Game Pass on their console or whatever) would make the decision to partner and even promote heavily, to the point of having a dedicated console bundle, a game that is a blatant rip-off the most famous franchise of Nintendo. Makes absolutely no business sense at all. And even if Sony are not trying to push their services and games on Nintendo consoles, I would find this just as disrespectful of a long time competitor.

Are the few bucks earned with Palworld worth burning bridges with Nintendo ? Sounds dumb to me.

 

[adamsapple]

I simply don't understand how members of the leadership of Xbox (who have been trying for several years to keep good relations with Nintendo because they want to push Game Pass on their console or whatever) would make the decision to partner and even promote heavily, to the point of having a dedicated console bundle, a game that is a blatant rip-off the most famous franchise of Nintendo. Makes absolutely no business sense at all. And even if Sony are not trying to push their services and games on Nintendo consoles, I would find this just as disrespectful of a long time competitor.

Are the few bucks earned with Palworld worth burning bridges with Nintendo ? Sounds dumb to me.

I think advertising on Xbox platforms will also become very low / stop now as long as it's under litigation.

 

[BlackTron]

Yeah I was astonished when I saw that Series S bundle with that uh "catch" phrase....holy shit lol

 

[daclynk]

Looks like the ramifications are already taking place.

Palworld has been taken off of Sony's TGS lineup. Might cause a delay in release too.


Before:

After:

 

[Buggy Loop]

The patent Nintendo is allegedly suing Palworld over was created after Palworld had already been out for months.

Fucking hell

WTF Nintendo?

They filed this vague as fuck patent after Palworld's release.

If they win, its an insult to intelligence. I hope they fucking lose.

 

[Robb]

Fucking hell

WTF Nintendo?

They filed this vague as fuck patent after Palworld's release.

If they win, it’s an insult to intelligence. I hope they fucking lose.

Has it been confirmed this is the patent yet?

Either way, unfortunately the filing referenced is just an update to patents filed years earlier, especially in Japan:

This application (20240278129) is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 17/949,666, filed on Sep. 21, 2022. This application also claims priority to Japanese Patent Application No. 2021-208275, filed on Dec. 22, 2021. The entire contents of all disclosures are incorporated herein by reference.

You can find it here by searching for the application number, if anyone is interested:

Patent Public Search Basic | USPTO

 

[HogIsland]

Microsoft and Sony should team up for Pocket Pair's legal defense.

 

[CliffBronger]

Would this be happening if Pocket Pair was a US or European company ?

 

[HogIsland]

Fucking hell

WTF Nintendo?

They filed this vague as fuck patent after Palworld's release.

If they win, its an insult to intelligence. I hope they fucking lose.

quick, update palworld to throw a bola at pals to capture them, patent un-infringed.

 

[ThaGuy]

Only reason I find this weird is because Nintendo in some cases doesn't mind developers using some of its patents. They have the analog stick on a touch screen patent and they allow everyone to use it from what I remember. They even sued a company cause they tried to patent the same tech and sell it while Nintendo lets it be used for free.

This will be an interesting case.

 

[Rentahamster]

This video is 7 months old.

 

[Lumpyoatmeal]

News Release : Sep. 19, 2024 "Filing Lawsuit for Infringement of Patent Rights against Pocketpair, Inc."

Press release of Nintendo Co., Ltd.

www.nintendo.co.jp

This game industry is crazy, a lot of these developers are not real creators at all. Astrobot is another title I recently seen that’s blatantly copying from Nintendo. Shout out to the real artists out here that actually take their time and due diligence to create real authentic shit.

 

[Danjin44]

This game industry is crazy, a lot of these developers are not real creators at all. Astrobot is another title I recently seen that’s blatantly copying from Nintendo. Shout out to the real artists out here that actually take their time and due diligence to create real authentic shit.

I disagree, Astrobot inspired by Mario games but they not copying them same way Palworld is doing, not even close.

For example Gravity Rush which I consider creative games is still inspired by games like Crackdown......Inspiration is not same thing as downright copying.

 

[Lumpyoatmeal]

Of course we have people here supporting Nintendo, gaf never disappoints

Patenting shit like this is ass but as a creator copying is never cool. As an artist you should be able to create your own shit.

 

[Lumpyoatmeal]

I disagree, Astrobot inspired by Mario games but they not copying them same way Palworld is doing, not even close.

For example Gravity Rush which I consider creative games is still inspired by games like Crackdown......Inspiration is not same thing as downright copying.

You can literally swap the Astrobot model with a Super Mario model using the same Astrobot animations and it wouldn’t look out of place at all.

 

[notseqi]

What patents?

patents of stealing from digimon

 

[Trilobit]

Videogamedunkey has an interesting in-depth video on the subject. It's a bit longer than his other videos, but he brings up some interesting points. A bit heavy on the legal lingo though.

 

[Angry_Megalodon]

Patenting shit like this is ass but as a creator copying is never cool. As an artist you should be create your own shit.

Stop embarrassing yourself.

 

[Danjin44]

You can literally swap the Astrobot model with a Super Mario model using the same Astrobot animations and it wouldn’t look out of place at all.

The visuals not the same, Astro Bots movements are not the same. you also have unique power ups like how Astro can turn in sponge.

No to mention unique stages based playstation games like LocoRoco and Ape Escape.