I find this to be an alarming trend. There is a very similar situation happening in the 3d printing world. Stratasys a very large company, is suing Bambu Labs for violation of patents. Stratasys is a very large and very old company with lots of old patents but it turns out all the patents mentioned in the suit were filed very recently in the world of 3d printing and the features and functions in question have been standard features of almost all printers for many years before the patent approvals. Yet they are currently only going after one particular company that so happens to be the fastest growing in the their space.
That's basic strat of the patent troll playbook, hit the little targets first, they can't afford the fight, set precedence and keep going up the food chain to bigger and bigger targets as your momentum grows and your precedent strengthens.
I know nothing from the 3D printing world, but from what you described, Stratasys is looking to be laughed out of court. Which, in the topic of this video, I hope that the patents being filed recently is enough to back Palworld in this lawsuit.
@@brvndxnl Unfortunately that's not how it works (in the US at least). Most businesses will weigh up the cost of the legal fight vs the cost of settling. Settling a case is by far the most common scenario here due to how expensive the legal fights are. The only time companies will proceed with the legal fight is if they see settling as an ongoing cost to their business, and usually it isn't as the patent troll will go after a different target next.
That doesn’t spell good for future 3d printer businesses. I was thinking of making one myself too. So many people want stuff 3d printed. Just not enough people willing to print.
@@asmosisyup2557 Bambu Lab is not based in the US, they are a Chinese company, though I can't say exactly how this would influence the potential outcome
Ubisoft retroactively patenting Assassins Creed's "Unlock tower to expose map" idea and slamming zelda would be hilarious as a consequence to this lawsuit if it works
Hopefully something so stupid doesn't happen again. Game mechanics that are fun and engaging should be free for all developers to use. The fact that freedom is this restricted is a really sad thing for everyone who makes or plays games.
Seems pretty obvious that Nintendo wants to create an environment where they can have a monopoly over a game genre, hopefully a judge can see how damaging this would be for the games industry as a whole. Pokemon games specifically have been very lazy in innovation and quality and Nintendo got mad when another company gave players what they wanted. Extremely petty which as we all know, is Nintendo's MO
Been saying that since this whole debacle started. Atari is about to become a quadrillionaire company over night. "Oh you moved your "character/controlled item on screen? PAY UP!"
And to the guy that invented Bertie the Brain, two years after WW2, 20 years before Pong, can sue everyone for videogames that use electricity to power their games.
@@eonaalythia8525 Please go read the contents of the actual patent, not the abstract. Every single Nintendo patent that they used to sue palworld is 20 thousand+ words long so they are anything but broad. They are so specific that it is hard to read even for lawyers. There is a reason those cases take multiple years. The patent you mention is not that simple because you can't patent something like that.
No it doesnt, please learn how patents work. The object has to capture a creature, release a creature, and start a battle, all from the same mechanic. Let me know when a fishing game starts a battle when you cast a line
@@DarthAnimal well technically struggling to reel in a fish can be considered a battle, as you’re fighting to catch the fish, also in Palworld you don’t start battles the same way you do in Pokémon, you attack the pal or the pal attacks you
Nintendo trying to get PalWorld / PocketPair for Patent Infringement is hilarious to me. Back when Super Mario 64 was being developed, one developer found out that SEGA held patents to 3D Cameras and Camera Switching, Mid-Development and they were scared that SEGA would take action. Nothing happened, SEGA didn't really care and didn't even take action against them. Mario 64 was a smash hit and everyone was happy. Sidenote: I am happy to list some sources about this.
@@CreeperMind89 There's an article by Pixeltron Called: The Making Of Super Mario 64 - full Giles Goddard interview which mentions this And Did you Know Gaming's Super Mario 64 Ft. Seth Everman.
Is that hilarious? It shows that Nintendo has been aware of this for years, and just because a competitor or themselves had not exercised their rights, does not mean that could not always do it.
From what ive heard this was a pretty widely done thing in the old days of video games in japan. Companies were worried what might happen if patent trolls bought up every little function and item you could use for a video game to essentially hold a monopoly or at least get royalties on any game released, so many bought up these mechanics themselves with a sorta gentlemens agreement to not use them on each other. Nintendo even faced this tactic being used on them before. But seems now suddenly when their biggest franchise faces some actual competition they arnt feeling so gentlemanly anymore.
I have no idea if anyone has pointed this out or not. But World of Warcraft has "Battle Pets," where you. 1. Find pets out in the world. 2. 'interact' with them. 3. Take turns using 'abilities' to lower the opponents health points. 4. Can be captured and that capture has a chance to fail. 5. You can't Capture Pets when fighting other people (Trainers?) 6. The lower the Health of the opponent, the higher capture chance. So I have no clue what is going on, since that has been in World of Warcraft since Mist of Pandaria in Sept 25th, 2012.
blizzard or rather microsoft is a american company, Sony will never try to sue a major american coorperation that they know they cannot win on or has to spend millions upon millions on legal fees.
If it’s like other cases, Pocket Pair may need to file a separate suit to try and have the patents invalidated and only then have the main case blocked or overturned, depending on where it gets to and the verdict.
Video games as a creative endeavor are a form of artistic creation. Saying it's okay to patent systems within video games is the equivalent of patenting oil paintings, and saying it's not okay for anybody to use oil-based paints. And that's not even talking about the predatory nature of how they specifically targeted business competitors in an attempt to build towards a monopoly.
Unfortunately games are corporate and very anti-consumer so it's likely if palworld bows down and settles it's gonna create a giant cascading wave of lawsuits and rushes to patent mechanics either to create various monopolies, or just to be petty to their competition. It's pathetic.
Except you can patent oil-based paints if you have a specific mixture/composition that gives your oil painting an unique look or difference to other oil painting. Oil painting is just the video game, not the game system in the video game, that is the wrong analogy. If you have a special paintbrush or paint roller for painting that you created, you can patent that too. Again, it is not that you cannot use oil-based painting, you just can't use that specific unique brand/mixture that was patented by the inventor. Morality and ethics is just a separate discussion to the actual patent use.
Would a better analogy be something like specific painting techniques? Like wet-on-wet or something? Idk. Yours works. Just didn't sound right in my head I guess.
But they are also software and technology, which can be patented. A more apt comparison would be to patent a specific oil paint that can dry in minutes as opposed to regular oil paint, and a technology like that deserves to be patented if invented.
@@coolyeh1017 i never understood that statement as laws were created with moral reasoning in the beginning as to figure out what was wrong and what was right which was then somehow twisted to what is legal and illegal. Heres an example of why that confuses me the law can say ending a life is legal and protecting a person is illegal even though that is morally backwards see what i mean?
@@Tm-dy2bp both true and false. Laws, while initially are based on moral consensus of a group of people, lose all moral basis when they have to actually be ratified in to any law system. Especially so in a boreoarctic hellhole that is modern day legal speak and beurocracy
I read that Nintendo got their Japanese patent fast-tracked, which is why it was approved while the U.S. patent is still pending. It would make sense, essentially that they file so many valid patents that they become a "trustworthy applicant", but that they're abusing that position now for various reasons. I don't think patents should ever be fast-tracked because it invites issues like this, but Japan seems to think otherwise.
doesn't really matter they are trying to patent things that have been used by dozens of games over the past 30+ years, hell THEY stole the idea for the mechanic from a 1960's anime. Pretty much falls under the same perveyance that words do you cannot patent them because they are understood to be used common place. The "mechanics" Nintendo patended are common place AF in games.. thousans of games run affoul of this patent.
@@bdhale34 I don't think you understood my comment, so I'll reiterate the points you seem to have missed. 1: Nintendo may have a trusted relationship with the Japanese Patent Office. 2: Nintendo seems to have fast-tracked a patent that never should have been filed, suggesting they're abusing this trust.
@@BioGenx2b I just wanna see Nintendo trying to sue Chunsoft, Heartbeat, Level-5 and Square Enix for "patent infringement" in Dragon Quest and getting eaten alive by the public
Time to race down to the patent office to protect the mechanic I just thought of: “Propelling a player controlled object or character off of a surface.”
You also have to think about the wording after the 5 milllion yen stating "plus additional damages" which is obscure and could be an insanely high undetermined amount.
The 5m is the carrot, the "additional damages" is the stick. They want a settlement that blocks pocketpair from continuing to make palworld games and the threat of damages if they go to trial is their way of getting there.
@ShivaTD420 would ut just be active in Japan the injunction.. and say could some us company sue over the mounts part and force alot of Nintendo out of the us?
"Plus late payment damages to Pokemon Company and Nintendo" which if you can pay the 5 million all at once it would be such a small amount that its unimportant
An interesting stance that sony could also take is "if pocket pair wins this and is successful, our partnership could allow us to literally obtain / support a competitor for one of nintendo's most popular IP's and have that on our console", literally a huge golden goose, though that would require significant foresight and intelligence on sony's part, which par for the course right now is unlikely, but still technically possible.
With Sony and their new Astrobot game, I can see this very likely (the similarities to Nintendo platformers is wild). Sony has no game in the monster genre iirc, so this is their titular IP for this genre.
I just saw a video about the lawsuit and basically the world of big business in Japan is very cutthroat and devious and this simple acquisition by Sony is putting pressure on Nintendo with their IP
I could be wrong on this, but IIRC i saw somewhere that pocket pair confirmed that they will be fighting this all the way through and not settling with sonys help and funding, because they had just secured a licence deal for there next game to be a ps4/5 exclusive for the first 6 months or something along those lines. So If I am correct on that your on the right track.
@@ZombieKitty321 I don't think it was securing a license deal for that. Sony music is partnering with palworld to make merch, nothing about their next game being ps5 exclusive. Infact, another company is trying to get the rights to make a palworld mobile game, sooooo yeah.
I would totally get it. Haven’t been super interested in palworld recently, but I highly despise how Nintendo does stuff like this. Pokémon has felt very dry as of late, but the only reason I play it is their games are more accessible while I’m away from my gaming PC. I like what Palworld brings. It’s a slightly darker take on Pokémon type concepts with a more open world feel that appeals to both older audiences and younger ones. Pokémon games don’t quite interest me story wise since they are so formulaic, and feel so child like. (No issue with child like usually, but I grew out of Pokémon and because they don’t add anything new the child like approach feels more insulting than anything.)
Tbh i think we need to berid of the entire pattent system. Another youtuber, Jörg Sprave, expressed his grievances with patents long ago. He's an inventor so patents exist to protect him, and yet he has been burned before where companies just steal what he has created and he cant afford to fight them. I think its a system that is way too easy to game. I think its archaic, and it made sense 2 - 300 years ago when there were a lot less people and a lot more inventors. I think patents now only exist so companies can pull shit like this.
Only the USA and Japan (of the relevant countries) allow patents on game mechanics, all other countries have realized that it's utter bullshit and should not be patentable. Patents have their place, but not within gaming.
patents ONLY protect people from other people abusing the patent system ... if the patent system didnt exist then no one would need protecting in the first place ... its litterally create the problem to sell the solution BUT in legal realm
On the issue of an expensive legal battle, there's one idea I don't see being discussed - Palworld has an *immense* amount of public goodwill that Nintendo have burned with this disgustingly predatory lawsuit, and especially since this case is so high-profile: Crowdfund the legal battle. Make it very public that you're fighting a patent that would murder game creativity, allow people to donate to your defense. Even if the money doesn't make that much of a difference, Nintendo will get absolutely eviscerated in the court of public opinion.
Sort of? While in the West the goodwill seems a bit burned. Nintendo has a lot of goodwill in the country where the lawsuit is happening, Japan. Over there the prevailing narrative is that PocketPair purposefully provoked Nintendo and must have done something wrong to obtain Nintendo's ire to the point they filed a patent lawsuit of all things. Furthermore, many Japanese, especially indie developers, saw PocketPair's initial statement about the lawsuit arrogant and disrespectful due to the word choice as PocketPair used aggressive and crude language instead of formal language suggesting that they are not professional. Regardless of what you or I think word choice and respect rules Japanese culture. The language saying that PocketPair will fight on behalf of all indie developers rubbed many Japanese the wrong way. As such most people in Japan (at least those who are aware of the lawsuit) are rooting for Nintendo or neutral about the case with few cheering on PockerPair's side.
@@coolyeh1017 I'd say that since this lawsuit is likely to set a precedent for game companies all over the world the public opinion of people outside of Japan is just as relevant as those inside of Japan. It would be very interesting to see how much PocketPair could crowdfund their side of the legal battle, especially if it was mostly or entirely funded by overseas fans.
those lawsuits are decided by people in yachs, they dont care about public goodwill and this whole situation wouldn't happen if they cared about public goodwill
It's so funny to see this issue coming up... especially since I remember playing Zanzarah: The Hidden Portal over two decades ago. The main game loop included a FPS component where you would fight Fairies (using your own Fairies) and then capture them with ball-like objects by throwing it at them... that game was released by THQ in 2002.
didint make as much money as palworld im sure, and in 2002 there wasnt the buzz that was created with palworld. they are only doing this as revenge, not as an actual legitimate concern over patents. also holy shit 2002 was 22 years ago....damn i feel old.
Omg, I did love that game! Completely forgot about that. Although you have to admit, that Pokemon was already a worldwide phenomenon at that point and one could argue, that Funtastics Development was "inspired" by Pokemon. Also, if I remember correctly, battle was within a seperate arena, not on the world map, like in the older pokemon games.
I agree with Thor. This is really horrible. This lawsuit saddens me as a consumer and disheartens me as an aspiring indie game developer. I sincerely hope PocketPair fights and wins this lawsuit. Because if Nintendo wins this lawsuit then it will basically tell other game companies that it’s okay to patent mechanics. And then the game industry will turn into this landscape of companies, divided by who own patents to specific mechanics and it will, as Khronos and Thor said, make it basically impossible for indie devs to exist. The game industry will turn into Avatar the Last Airbender with Nintendo being Fire Lord Sozin. This lawsuit is a tipping point for the game industry.
There is no way Pocketpair can win given how Japanese law works as it is. Now, if you all can make them suffer from the sheer amount of negative reaction...
@@atreidestrooper It's really going to depend on if Sony decides to back Pocket Pair. They were starting to invest in the company and Palworld. It's probably what caught Nintendo's eye. If Pocket Pair gets access to Sony's war chest we might see this get really ugly.
Patenting game mechanics is already a thing. Want to do something like the Nemesis system from Shadow of War/Shadow of Mordor games? Nope, patented. Want to have a minigame during a loading screen? Nope, also patented.
Japan has a broken legal system that is severely behind even the third world in most aspects. More than likely PocketPair may lose, but that doesn't necessarily means that this would fly in other jurisdiction across the planet. As I said, Japan has one of the worst legal system on Earth, so no need to feel doom out of this.
@@andrewdarby8843 agreed, as a community all gamers have a chance to make thier opinion heard and change gaming for the better by supporting the opinion they agree with.
As much as I agree with you. As mentioned in the video, they are asking for an absurdly low amount for a reason. A crowdfund isn't going to even make a dent in the overall cost in legal fee's which will be in the millions or even 10's of millions. Also the judge might order Palworld to cease operations while the court case is ongoing, which would halt their profits. Which could be as short as a year or 2 or as long as 15 years. I really do hope they fight it.
Y'know, there was a really great video by Moon Channel called that talks about the complicated dynamics at play here, which includes some very interesting explanations of the dynamics between independent Dojinshi (which means self-published work for those who don't know otherwise, I know some people think it means exclusively something else...) and big companies and publishers. Doujin circles frequently create works that violate copyright, and even with the lack of Fair Use in Japanese law, big companies frequently ignore them, which is this sort of social contract. If some independent work gets too big, people pull it down, because it threatens the social contract that allows the freedom independent creators have to create whatever they want. This is why when Nintendo announced they were suing Palworld, many Japanese people supported Nintendo, they assume that Palworld has broken that social contract. My comment cannot explain all of the nuances of his video, I recommend people watch it for the full explanation. EDIT: It also goes into how this lawsuit is not Nintendo vs Palworld, it is Nintendo vs Sony, the video goes into that dynamic too, its really interesting.
I watched the same video. The other information that stuck out to me was that Sony was involved. Sony and Nintendo have bad blood when Nintendo backed out of the Nintendo PlayStation project (right?).
@@meep7605 social contract doesn't matter because there is no such contract for video games in the first place. They don't own artstyle. What japanese say on this doesn't matter
7:45 PocketPair may not be owned by Sony legally, but in terms of Japan's corporate culture, Sony is PP's belligerent big brother that PP will struggle to say no to. Sony helping PP here is comparable to in the 90s when Nintendo helped GameFreak and that led to Nintendo controlling the company and Pokemon IP without technically owning it
Gen 2 was supposedly the last gen, but the IP got big and with the founding of TPC we got the formulaic release of the rest of the pokemon gens. In the Gamecube era this was apparent, notably with Colosseum and XD being gen 2 games despite Ruby & Sapphire being 2 years old games at that point. Gen 3 is also when they got another pokemon designer besides Ken Sugimori. Palworld might be safe from that as they are partnered with Sony music group rather than Sony entertainment. Pocketpair also reassured that the partnership will keep them as an indie studio despite the big names.
I mean if it would mean Pocketpair winning the legal battle it would be worth it. Nothing in life comes free. Every decision is at the cost of something else. I think Pocketpair making Nintendo suffer and defending their IP worth it. They made half a billion dollars (gross) off Palworld. They've proven they know how to make a good product.
@@D3adCl0wn That was a bit of a misunderstanding, gen 2 was hugely successful but they were already concerned with kids losing interest. The Gamecube games were Nintendo's attempt at both a console Pokemon game as well as more mature titles aimed at those older kids and teens. There was also the GBA/Gamecube link cable they wanted to show off. Game Freak sold substantial portions of Pokemon to both Nintendo and Creatures Inc. Even when TPC was formed, before Pokemania set in, they were struggling to keep the lights on. Its not the same situation as with Palworld. If Sony were to swoop in to rescue them however things could potentially change, they could be the next SquareEnix.
I am so glad he mentioned Shadows of Mordor because that was such an amazing game the fact that they prevented other people from using that mechanic has stunted the growth of the gaming community
@@AfutureVno, no it wouldn’t be. This seems so detached of some people because games, but how’s this. You invent a hand spade, but the trowel exists, you’re now getting sued by the inventor of the spade for the ACT of digging with a hand tool. Or the automobile club going after Henry ford for his car sales. Horrible man he may have been, if he lost that suit, it’d be a handle of companies not simply selling cars, but practically owning the mere concept of a combustion engine driven, four wheeled vehicle. This is modern Nintendo either forgetting their own past, or actively going and saying, “We can do this, but only us, no one else. If you borrow, or copy, or innovate from us like we originally did from them, you have done wrong, but it’s fine when we did it, no matter how close we were to the mechanic’s of those we took from.” Patented back then or not, it’s incredibly hypocritical, scummy, and corrupt.
@@nameoftheedgyvariety4988 I fail to see how it is hypocrisy at all. Nintendo has never said or acted the way you claimed. For them to be hypocritical, they would have to have willingly infringed on someone's patent and now turn around and demand people respect their parents. Anything else is just you confusing inspiration with infringement.
An important thing to know re: prior art. Non-patented prior art renders a patent invalid, HOWEVER only patented prior art is typically reviewed during patent application. That prior art has to be brought up in an infringement or invalidation lawsuit, at very high cost. Some say that patent offices have an incentive to do this, as it incentivizes people to register more patents and hence get them more money.
Timing is everything. Under USA Patent Law, Patents are never retroactive nor broad sweeping. While the Patent Holder must check if the technology is not already made by another. Among other factors. Long regulation short... These Patents won't survive in USA Courts even if it was filed. It's not innovative nor hyper specific. Since USA Patents do not give ownership to the concept.
This lawsuit seems like, in my opinion, like a teacher's kid coming up to you on the playground, who already has a Gameboy, saying you stole their Gameboy and having the teacher give your Gameboy to them. 😡
@zambsDGOW Yeah, I had something similar happen to me, but with a Transformer. One that my dad had played with when he was a kid. I brought it over to someone's house. That person said their grandparent bought it for them. The parents even said that they saw him open the toy in front of them.
Something similar literally happened at the school I went to. A boy had a portable CD player in his bag, and a girl saw it and wanted it. She told the teacher it was hers, and the teacher forced the boy to give the player to the girl without doing anything to verify the ownership of the CD player. Teacher didn't even call any parents. Fortunately, the boy's parents found out and decided to raise hell until the school forced the girl to return the stolen item. School literally promoting theft.
One additional thing, while it's not the same mechanic, Ark uses balls to store your dinosaurs and move them easily around. The taming mechanic doesn't match, but the sending/retrieving mechanic does in the exact same way with Pokémon and Palworld and Ark was in early access since 2014-2015. The item in particular was added in the Extinction expansion iirc was 2018-2019.
I vow to never buy another Nintendo game if this goes through, I will not put my money in the hands of a company that is using our money, to destroy our video games. If this doesn't go down in the record books as the first time Nintendo lost a lawsuit they initiated, I hope everyone stops investing in this company to show that we don't support their actions.
I'm a producer at an indie studio and I just wanted to say your vid is a really instructive and insightful overview of this case. It's one I've been following for a while and you covered a couple of points I wasn't familiar with, thank you!
I think there should be laws that prevent companies from being able to drag lawsuits out, because that tactic is nearly always used to drain the poorer of the two of their funds so they can no longer fight.
who cares, the most important is companies suing individuals, if you don't have an entity when they sue the person you have no choice and no protection at all.
@@pencilcheck Individuals?... Indie Corporations have no financial ability to fight lawsuits at this level even if they are legally in the right. Individuals often times are not missed by mega Corporations.
@@pencilcheck individuals in this case would be the poorer of the 2. I didn't miss any of them with the statement. Also, to say who cares would make me think you side with the bigger companies because what I said would even the playing field for all parties included.
@@dannym2359 you do know that in law, poor or not, you can always fake bankruptcy for the corporation and the case is closed the real money is still resided at the individuals. Meaning dragging out wouldn't matter to smaller companies, they just need to declare bankrupcy then that's it. but for individuals that is a completely different issue. if you don't know that also shows that you don't know much about how law are actually used at those levels. big companies vs companies means nothing to individuals like us. But to be honest, i'm not sure how your statement is relevent to the case here, palworld is rich now, they partnered with sony, so they have tons of money and can fight it out with nintendo, not sure what is the problem here?
Moon Channel made a good point in that the only reason Nintendo is going after Palworld is because Sony is backing it, and Nintendo considers Sony an existential rival.
Eh not really there's be never a Sony feud after the failed NS console Never have the two company's clashed ever Let's say it's true Nintendo trying to maintain a monopoly crushing a smaller competitor from growing bigger And they are willing to ruin a small company to do so
Which is why they're pursuing them with patents that PocketPair can fight using games that they themselves have made. People say that Nintendo's legal team always makes perfectly calculated moves but given the context around this, the lawsuit actually feels like a desperate move from Nintendo for once.
@@misaaftonYou realize that business isn't like rap beef? That you didn't hear anything, doesn't mean that there isn't something. Even more so in the Japanese business world. But even here, ever heard of Nvidia and Apple clashing? Probably not. But you still can't use Nvidia cards with Macs, only AMD/Radeon. Even for their AI stuff - Apple doesn't buy servers that have Nvidia Hardware. There's more little stuff that showed that they basically have beef since their fallout a bit over 10 years ago. On the other side, Nvidia really isn't a company anyone likes to work with 😂. Terribad business partners. Anyway, I can recommend the moon channel video. It's done by a lawyer too, but he has the advantage of having decent knowledge about the culture of Japanese business relations.
Too bad I'm not a Sony fan, because this has convinced me to not deal with Nintendo ever again. I was already extremely hesitant in the past thanks to their general litigious nature, but I think this solidified my decision.
I feel like there's at least one good inventive for Pocketpair to fight, and that's an immense amount of goodwill from basically any gamer that isn't in the 'Nintendo can do no wrong' camp.
@@1IGG everybody realize that. The problem is the fact it's the consumer that will ultimately pay the price for this. Us gamers will receive worse games as a result that is the entire point of it. Being able to patent a game mechanic should not be allowed.
@@1IGGThis is a big company bullying a smaller company. There is not a company in the video game space that push Nintendo around like Nintendo can push around PocketPair.
what people fail to realize that honestly only a few like square enix and atlus could actually patent troll nintendo as any company outside japan would find it hard as hell. stop acting like studios like ubisoft has a chance to patent troll nintendo when they dont. it would be incredibly stupid to try that on nintendo in japan where any of this could happen. outside japan most attempt would fall on thier ass.
@@evanm2570 I saw bugs in Mario and Zelda games wdym 😂 yes, they're harder to find compairing to other games, but never did they release only perfect games.
This is the equivalent of Microsoft patenting the Doom idea: shooter, where you go around a map killing demons using certain tools. Since idSoftware was one of the first ones developing it, they can get the registration and screw everyone from the date the patent gets the registration.
Problem is that Nintendo isn't the first one to do these mechanics. If anything, based on the game some of the patents are filed on, Pokémon: Acreus, Pocketpair beat Nintendo on those mechanics by releasing Craftopia years before Pokemon: Acreus.
The issue with the patent dates in Japan is by design, is due to their "special" type of patents. They're called something like "continuation patent", which means that a patent can "evolve" as a project/prototype evolves, either because some stuff didn't work, or something else was figured out and added to the patent. So those dates that are mentioned are not the "oiginal" patent date, but the date of the filing of the "continuation" of that patent, essentially "updating" it. So Nintendo got some earlier patents, waited for Palworld to come out, and "updated" said patents based on what they saw Palworld released, so they can do a more obvious claim of patent infringement where the patent was tailor made for litigation. This is possible in Japan, due to their "special" patents. In the US, this claim would not be possible.
There was a video I watched when this all first happened. I don't know if it is 100% the same in Japan, but this lawyer said that they can't go after Craftopia due to the game coming out *before* the "parent" patent. Even though these three came *after* Palworld released, they can still use them as if they are from the time of the parent patent. Something a lot of people don't know about and with a bit of research is interesting. I went down a large rabbit hole in legal stuff once this all started and learned interesting things about patents.
Since Craftopia predates the patent to the point it can't be enforced on Craftopia, I'd think that would mean the patent's invalid to begin with: there's already prior art from someone other than the one filing the patent which can be described by the patent.
This is a copy/paste of a comment I made on another video back when the lawsuit was first filed so the information and wording is a bit dated, but is still relevant and explains the application dates being after Palworld's release: A Japanese Patent Lawyer by the name of Kurihara wrote an article about this lawsuit. Basically, he said that since the lawsuit was filed jointly by both Nintendo and The Pokemon Company we can assume the lawsuit is regarding one of the 28 patents and 4 divisional patents that are jointly registered by both companies. In case you don't know what a divisional patent is, it's basically a more detailed "child" patent that is enforceable by the "parent" patent's registration date. Additionally, you are able to sue based on each individual divisional patent rather than just the "parent" patent. All four of those divisional patents were submitted for approval this year (one submitted in July and the others in February and March) and went through a special, sped up examination and all point back to the same "parent" patent from December 2021. The catching mechanic is one of these divisional patents (Patent No. 7545191) with two of the three other divisional patents also having some coloration to the catching of Pokemon while the last is regarding the riding of Pokemon. Quick Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer, this is just what I read.
@@smashbother5684 No, he just described the original patent as a "killer patent" that would be hard to not infringe upon when making a Pokemon like game. I've also heard, and don't quote me on this, that it's harder to invalidate an already existing patent in Japan than it is in the USA but is still something that can be done. Other articles reference IP "experts" and say litigation may last up to five years.
They actually patented animal riding? Something that humans have been doing for 5,500 years? I would think that something humans have been doing since the Bronze Age would be too obvious to patent.
DMCA'ing fan made gameplay videos DMCA'ing fan made games Deleting game stores and making it impossible to buy their older games Deleting emulators from existence and killing off game preservation. Making Gary Bowser pay them for life to send a message ...didn't get your attention?
the only good i can see from this is that pal world just got a story update, Japanese shogunate, with each building representing each department in Nintendo's name. With pals representing the latest game they made, for example their Brazilian branch with the pablo leader would use the metroid pal, the Corporate recycling sector being humans disposing of materials in fire burning by fire pals, human resource using people to make conveyor belt items and so on. It has been a long time since I did a research paper on them, but there is a Reddit thread and a fandom showing all the departments of Nintendo, in the Reddit thread they explain the games they are responsible for making and other stories about the game departments.
Nintendo doesn’t care about the patents or for that matter does it care about Palworld either. What it cares about is Sony getting into its Pokemon merchandise with it own fuzzy monster franchise.
@ narr, on its own Palworld is a nothing burger. Like retail World of Warcraft has pet collecting/battling and Nintendo isn’t going after them. No this is about Nintendo and its old adversaries Sony over the future of Pokemon. Which to be honest is a good thing as Pokemon of late has become generic and stale so having a competitor like the Palworld Company will force them to make a better game.
Anyone remember when Namco Patented loading games.... that's why we got all those 3D turn arounds and slide shows of 'hints and tips' instead of having little mini games to play during the loading screens. Loading games have been around since the middle of the 80's, way before Namco filed their patent for them in 1994! Apparently no one wanted to go through the process of challenging the patent back then. In this case what's being patented is much more core to the game's gameplay. So I hope they fight it
This reeks of just bad lawyering. The lawyers likely found that the designs weren't actually similar enough to warrant a lawsuit and wouldn't bring on a copyright case. For some reason, Nintendo or the Pokemon Co didn't want to drop the case, so instead the lawyers are trying to exploit a legal loophole in the gaming industry, which is patenting. Because typically videogames aren't patented by mechanic, it hasn't really set a precedent on a large scale. But if Nintendo succeeds, the issue isn't how restrictive their patent would be, but rahter that it would open the floodgates for other companies like microsoft and EA to follow suit. This would end in a legal war that would implode itself, as mechanics in videogames should be under a creative license, not a patent, meaning that there would be no way to enforce a patent.
@@joshellis53 I didn't suggest that microsoft would do that, I'm saying it would open the precedent for companies LIKE microsoft to follow the same. Being able to hold a monopoly on a videogame mechanic would be insane, and seems like the thing a corporation would try to do to monetize gaming more.
Nintendo didn't even consider Palworld a threat at all until half a year later when the game made hundreds and hundreds of millions. It's cutting into their future titles and business so now they're gonna bully the less beloved company. It's straight up scare tactics. If they succeed in this I'm just permanently just boycotting Nintendo products. Pokémon has grown stale for years regardless because of how safe and monotonous they've gotten. Competition is the greatest way to breed creativity especially in the artistic fields such as gaming. They could just make a better game and make EVEN MORE money. But no, because it's cutting into their profits they're gonna be petty and bully the industry...and effectively set it back by decades. If people start to just exclude mechanics because various companies throw patents around for game mechanics? I hope pocket pair doesnt settle and bow down, and they win.
@@elijahpark5344 Well... EA has already started suing other games from using gatcha mechanics and loot boxes that EA has apparently patented. This was in the news while ago but didn't arouse further discussion.
one thing we may not want to forget is the fact that palworld is working alongside sony, who is a notable rival and long ago enemy of nintendo (source, theres a video going into the history of japan's side of the lawsuit)
they were once at the start friendly until nintendo backed out of the playstation project and the playstation released was a success and they been enemies since. TLDR: they are enemies/rivals now WHOLLY because of nintendos backstabbing. its fully deserved. comeupperance comes for us all. Karma's a bitch and always will be.
There are fees for late payment, so the cost is actually a few million dollars USD, not just the 70k. Also, i must say... people are reporting this on gaming news sites by saying they are suing for COPYRIGHT infringement... Seen at least 3 stories where they get that detail wrong.
People even in the comments on this video frequently interchange and confuse trademark, copyright, and patent. It is sort of why we pay the big lawyers who spend years studying law school, taking the bar (and patent bar), and practicing for years to understand and fight with the law. Even then many judges and lawyers get it wrong because the law is very complex and at times ambiguous.
It is already illegal in the US to patent game mechanics, but not for video games, it is illegal to patent game mechanics for board games/ any physical game or sport.
Even if it's not the case for vidya, the Supreme Court would very likely determine they fall under a similar category of activity and as such this law is applicable to videogames as well
It was explained to me that the new patents are actually divisional patents. Meaning it was aspects of an old patent that was stripped out of the original patent and thus share the old start date and timeframe from the original patent. Purpose meaning they can push only that one small part of a patent and if the divisonal dies in the courts the main one stays safe.
For the most part, yes. JP is one of the most restrictive jurisdictions, but setting that aside, if you have a live application and a target, you will file continuations / divisionals (distinction not important in this case). One part, as you said, is to keep something alive that is not in the case, but mostly it cuts down on litigation costs because you tailor the language of your claims (the only thing you can enforce) to map onto the target as strongly as possible.
doesnt explain why they were allowed to keep super Vague shit intact though. as patents in mechanics have to be pretty precise which none of these patents thier using are. iirc the warner bros had to do quite a few changes to finally get thier patent for nemesis to go through. kudos to them for attempting so much and finally got it secured but it sucks for the industry though.
@@uiharuhimeji5614 I am a patent attorney and I implore you to stop posting so confidently about a system with which you are so unfamiliar. I was going to try to explain what's wrong in your reply, but I've taken a look at your other comments on this video and you are so misinformed that there's not enough space to explain to you how the patent system works. For example, it doesn't matter whether a patent troll is in Japan because a patent can be asserted against Nintendo in any jurisdiction that grants the patent (patents cover make, use, or sale of infringing products regardless of where the company is based) and a gamecube game would be considered prior art as most, if not all, jurisdictions have a global reach for any public disclosures older than 1 year from the priority date (although I think JP requires absolute novelty as of the priority date).
Corporations are legally required to maximize profit for shareholders by whatever means necessary, including illegal means if the profit outweighs the cost of lawsuits.
I'll add again. I think the game mechanics patent question was answered in the table top gamming space when the owners of DnD could not sue for the use of mechanics. They could for use of their monsters and characters and art.
Imagine how bad it would be if DnD had managed to patent gameplay mechanics. We wouldn't have all the great RPG games we have now, even World of Warcraft wouldn't have been possible. Literally every RNG mechanic in RPG games comes from DnD.
Aren't there entire genres that wouldn't exist if you could patent game mechanics? I'm not a Palworld fan, but this isn't about Nintendo v Palworld. This is bigger then that and that's really important to bring up. Thanks for covering it. I figured you'd have a more nuanced take about why this is bad then just doomsday, which it definitely is feeling a bit like a game dev doomsday
OR they could've just NOT deliberately antagonized them by ripping off Pokeballs. There's a REASON literally every other game in the genre used their OWN ideas instead of ripping off the concept of pokeballs.* I mean, come on now. It's not even INSPIRED by it. They just used a synonym for pokeballs! "It's not pocket monsters, it's purse creatures!" That's basically what they did, but worse. They deliberately antagonized them, and it may ruin the entire genre as a result. *Discs ,crystals, magnets, conversations, etc. All sorts of options and they went with NONE of them. They KNEW what they were doing.
@@FF8Irvine_Fanthat’s like getting mad at an artist for using another artist’s technique or style in their art. It’s absurd. Sure I find it a bit on the nose, but to be fair no idea can be entirely original. Would it have been better if it were a box? Still the same concept. For a better comparison, and how I understand it, it’s like someone using a spacieux colour pallet/type of oil paint and patenting it so other artists cannot use those colors or brands. It’s toxic to the community. You can patent the art piece, but not the materials used to make it. You can patent the art of the pokeball, but not the mechanics behind it as that sets a weird precedent to other games with similar mechanics. It’s less that Palworld is so super different, but more, if Nintendo wins this, they could potentially wind up making a monopoly over a genre which is not good.
@@DarthAnimal You can throw a pal sphere at a creature without initiating battle and capture them. If Craftopia isn't infringing, then Palworld isn't either.
The hilarity is that filing the lawsuit probably cost Nintendo more than $64k. What Nintendo is attempting to do is illegal under international patent law, but they used a loophole where the original maker did not file for patent and the patent examiners are woefully ill-equipped to evaluate novelty in software. The claims in Nintendo's patents should never have been granted, and if the examiners had been shown actual prior art it never would have been. Evil is rising around the world, and this is just one more example. I have the principles to never buy a Nintendo product again, and I encourage you all to do the same.
This is really just a microcosm of modern investing practices. Investing in IP is big right now and it's why you're seeing Japanese companies make more gameplay patents even when most don't plan on enforcing them or outright know they're not truly enforceable just because they can tell investors that they're holding a bunch of IP and potentially secure more funding.
They didn't patent monster catching mechanics, they patented monster catching in 3D space with balls that trigger capture and battles in that space. The appropriate frame of reference would be something like fan Pokemon mods for Minecraft.
@@SuperSmashDolls So they patented something that existed in other video games in 2012 and existed in a PocketPair title in 2020. Sounds like a bad decision to me.
Not sure if Japan has any sort of "friend of the court" briefings, but it would be nice if Microsoft's Japanese branch could file one in support of Pocket Pair considering World of Warcraft also runs afoul of these in various ways.
Why would microsoft aid a competitor? Patents take YEARS to litigate, Nintendo is only doing this as an emergency button after Sony partnered with Palworld.
@@techpriest4347 Microsoft would be aiding a small fish 3rd party developer that can release on their systems while hurting a big fish rival that won't release their games on X-box.
@@techpriest4347 because it is in EVERYONES best interest that Nintendo doesn't get a monopoly on the monster Catcher genre. Every big publisher has skin in this fight.
@@sanatana1 you do realize that there are millions of monster catcher game released every year, and they are all fine. if you are only about supporting sony, then you are also the same as those supporting nintendo lol
@@pencilcheck Do you listen at all? Pocketpair is NOT owned by Sony. They are PARTNERS with Sony and only after having already solo developed Palworld.
8:30 I don't know about it being a bad decision, the money is one thing but Nintendo is seeking an injunction against Palworld as well as the money and given they just signed a deal with Sony to make Palworld into it's own whole franchise complete with an anime, merch, and probably more games no longer being able to sell Palworld in its current state would probably hurt that.
There's a non-zero chance that this sets a precedent. But it's actually possible that at some point in the future wizards of the Coast the owners of dungeons & dragons will technically be able to sue people for using the concept of hit points in their game. This is truly heinous and quite frankly I hope the legal system deals with this properly otherwise the entire industry might collapse
Japanese patents system is first to file, not first to release. You can overturn patents due to prior art in Japan, but it’s massively expensive and extremely rare. The only way to legally fight via prior art per rule 29 is that the new product must be identical or virtually indistinguishable from another product. Article 39 favors that the first person to file a patent doesn’t have the burden of proving a patent is valid and original after the patent is granted. Nintendo is betting on the rule “I’m big, you’re small, I will win even if I loose, because no matter which way you choose if I don’t win at first will make you pay, and win that way.
It should. Even with the scummy move they pulled filing them as continuations of a patent from 2021, Nintendo should kick rocks because of Craftopia coming out before that patent did.
Absolute pinnacle of scumbaggery that they can file the patents AFTER Palworld is released then sue them after the fact. I seriously hope that the japanese courts understand how bad a precedent it would set to allow a company to retroactively sue for patent infringement.
Technically speaking, the patent was filed with for Legends: Arceus, 2 (3 if you count filing date) years before Palworld's release. The 2024 patent is a child patent that covers a specific chunk of the parent patent for Arceus, so they can prosecute for violating that specific part. However, Pocket Pair had a version of the same mechanic in their game Craftopia- which came out in 2020, well before the patents for Arceus were filed.
@@tygerion4404 But it's also a mechanic that was used in ARK Survival Evolved in 2017, which is ever so slightly before 2020. Pixelmon mod for minecraft did it well before 2020 as well. Nintendo has less than a leg to stand on with this patent.
Moon channel, a lawyer TH-camr did a video about this, his explanation being that this was a preemptive attack against Sony for entering into the sort of Pokemon market.
Imo , Moon have not so great take on the matter , one it was Nintendo who switched the deal to Philip to make their own disk and two , he feel Palworld can cause brand confusion which is bogus cus Pokemon have decades of advertising theirs franchises which is now one of the largest on Earth , anyone with access to media can easily recognize Pokemon , in court of law there is no place for " feeling " . Though he still right about one thing , that Sony rattle Nintendo which prompt Nintendo to nib the bub fast .
Sony partnering with Palworld was the first shot in this battle. Also Sony Games is doing this to weaken Nintendo's flagship ip because their own company isn't doing well.
@@techpriest4347 Well when you fund a game like concord it does hurt your reputation, so it's not surprising. (Not to mention the ps5 pro shenanigans.)
I wonder that if Nintendo looses, patent hungry companies (like Nintendo) could try to make essentially tech demo sized games first to patent things, and then use those patents in their games, rather than waiting until the game is released to have ground for patenting it. As the former would lead to them possibly being able to quickly patent things before others can do it, avoiding the Craftopia and Arceus thing, as I assume they both were being worked on for a while. Maybe this would also lead to them quickly patenting things they hear other people are working on, if they are also working on something similar.
They could patent mechanics only if they can prove they are the first to design it. The legal mess surrounding this case is that it allegedly tries to do something retroactively. Patents obtained through tech-demos would only be doing it for the sake of getting the patent, not trying to take possession of mechanics that you believe the competitors are already working on. Patents surrounding vague mechanics in technology is, while scummy, still legal if you don't have someone with prior existing cases of that patented technology.
@@Armament0fJustice i want to see nintendo's side or see a third party revealing the case details because this is palworld's lawyer manipulation as they might not reveal everything about the case for their benefit.
@@Armament0fJustice I also share the similar sentiment that it makes no sense to patent mechanics of a game, unfortunately, there are so many game mechanics patent out there though, and some also does it retroactively. I do wonder if there are other sides of the lawsuits that palworld didn't reveal?
Patenting game mechanics is like patenting police chases in movies. "You can't have a chase between the protagonist and law enforcement, we own the patent for that, give us money!"
4:00 so would this mean the lawsuit would be retro active meaning they can go after anyone who has ever made this mechanic in any game ever past or future? if so this will destroy gaming advancement forever
The thing about "filing the patent later" is actually incorrect. The patent they point to as-is has been in existence since after Palworld came out, correct, but the contents of the patent are not new. The patent they reference is a consolidation patent which incorporated several pre-existing patents (which existed since the 90s). That is a process that is allowed by the patent office and the reason you would want to consolidate these patents into a single one is that, if you can show that someone went against a PART of the patent, he disregarded the WHOLE of the patent. So they put many of their gameplay patents into one to be able to say that all these mechanics are protected, even if a court only agreed that a part of them are so far.
@@absolstoryoffiction6615 They are when they exclusively unify pre-existing patents, genius. And not that it matters because patent law is very internationalised, but this is a Japanese case brought in Japan. Doesn't look like you have any idea what you're talking about. Wanna hear about this at length, several lawyers in the field have already made lengthy videos on the topic on TH-cam, and I'm not wasting my time typing out a two-page response just for you to go "NUH-UH!". Watch legal Mindset or whoever. There's more than enough material to inform yourself on, since you clearly didn't beforehand.
@DeReAntiqua Um, actually, in regard to USA Patent Law. That's not a thing USA does. We don't uphold Parent Patents. Why do you think we gave WB about 20 years since all USA Patents have 25 years max. That's more of a Japanese Patent Law regulation. USA doesn't have a forever continuous Patent as a regulation. Again, USA Patents are not retroactive. And there is no such thing as an International Patent. It's all jurisdiction by jurisdiction. State by State for Patents exclusive to America.
@@absolstoryoffiction6615 Uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuh... yes. It is EXPLICITLY a thing. And yes, I'm turning off reply notifications for this thread after this and outright muting you two mouthbreathers because I'm not wasting my time endlessly responding to half-witted wanna-be lawyers whose whole argument is "NUH-UH! THE LAW WORKS LIKE _I AND I ALONE_ DECIDE!". 35 U.S.C. §121, for instance, states: If two or more independent and distinct inventions are claimed in one application, the Director may require the application to be restricted to one of the inventions. _If the other invention is made the subject of a divisional application, which complies with the requirements of section 120, it shall be entitled to the benefit of the filing date of the original application._ A patent issuing on an application with respect to which a requirement for restriction under this section has been made, or on an application filed as a result of such a requirement, shall not be used as a reference either in the Patent and Trademark Office or in the courts against a divisional application or against the original application or any patent issued on either of them, if the divisional application is filed before the issuance of the patent on the other application. The validity of a patent shall not be questioned for failure of the Director to require the application to be restricted to one invention.
@DeReAntiqua Under the Original Patent by the original duration, yes, if given the max duration of 25 years or less. One can merge their future Patents with the older Patent if it is derived from the original. However, by no means, it does not extend the duration nor renew it entirely. That is USA Patent Law. Which is why WB was given 20 years and not a perpetual exclusive ownership of the Patent. USA Patents can not even be renewed as well. You've stated nothing new to me. Oh, and Time isn't the only factor which can null & void a Patent in America.
having played pal world and being a huge Pokémon fan since the 90's. it plays more like Rune factory or harvest moon or even Jade cocoon. but it's funny the length these people go to assert their dominance.
It's Palworld being in the monster genre first hand. People might argue if it is similar to Pokemon or not, but people think of Pokemon every time there's another game in the genre. With Palworld being the 2nd largest IP in said genre (by a long shot even the third and rest of monster games combined), TPC has to make a move whether Pocketpair partnered with Sony/Aniplex or another. When Palworld gets it's own anime and TCG/merch, the comparison people do will become paramount as this is not exclusive to games now.
I saw this comparison on another video discussing the lawsuit update and it's a more accurate comparison. Palworld isn't "Pokemon with guns", it's Ark Survival with cute pokemon-like creatures. It plays absolutely nothing like Pokemon at all. The core of its gameplay is a survival crafting exploration game that is supported by a monster collecting and battling mechanic.
I really hope Thor checks out Moonchannel's video, because he covers a lot of the background corporate ownership details that are likely the real reasons this lawsuit is happening. Short version: this is a defensive lawsuit by Nintendo indirectly targeted at Sony
Regarding the lawsuit, it’s less about Paleworld and PP, and more about Nintendo vs Sony. PP just became the battleground in this bigger rivalry. It's really a case of two major companies clashing, not a big corporation vs an indie dev. Moon Channel did an excellent video explaining why Nintendo likely wouldn't have sued PP without Sony being involved. Definitely a good Video to check out before making loud claims that Nintendo is the devil.
The worst result of this if it gets through is the possible defensive fallout that could damage the game industry. If competitors can file patents after you release a game and then sue you for using a mechanic before they filed the patent you create an environment where you are now forcing developers to defensively file patents on their mechanics. If everyone starts patenting mechanics then the environment of games will get very narrow very fast.
the patent space is just like the nuke space ... we all enjoy peace on the pretense that everyone wont press their special red button ... but when someone does that flimsy reality just falls apart
@@DarthAnimal Two years. They're suing under the _Japanese_ patent, _NOT_ the US patent. Notably, the Japanese patent was filed two years after Pocket Pair released Craftopia- which has the same concept. Pocket Pair had already created the function Nintendo patented years before Nintendo patented it. Even if we go by the US patent date, Craftopia still means that Pocket Pair had created the function a year before Nintendo patented it.
Pretty sure they already have case law in Japan over game mechanics. I remember some of the big guys going against each other, every company in Japan has been burned by patent trolls and hence a patent arms race between everyone and the Japanese Patent office is overwhelmed.
Nintendo would've likely had my support if they went for Copyright Infringement. That, to me as a layman, seems like they have a fairly strong leg to stand on. This patent lawsuit seems like we collectively entered a portal to loopy-land.
Tbh the fact its Nintendo might actually be a they want to lose or they want the press. Nintendo has an absolute ton of patent lawsuits if they win, they may actually hope to lose
If Nintendo's lawyers believed they had a valid copyright claim, Palworld would have never been released. They'd have been sued into the ground after the first announcement.
This is pretty much how I feel. I haven't played it, but it seems like palword is a very original and interesting game. I think it's a bad move not to commit to an original art style because they're always gonna look like off-brand pokemon at this rate. I don't love the pokemon style, but the palworld critter design looks even worse to me. Maybe this is unrealistic, but I think getting sued for copyright might even forcibly help them stand out in the long term
I hope Palworld sees this SPECIALLY the part at 16:42 and it helps them take these dishonorable people down. Not really losing anything myself Nintendo wise, I stopped supporting them years ago!
well, you have someone who will get more lawsuits from nintendo for streaming all pirated games early, why not you join them? see how it feels like to get sued by nintendo.
@@richardtickler8555 pirating is never about stealing but loss of revenue since software can be duplicated with no big cost, you can't steal something that can be duplicated anywhere. pirating = less future sales in their argument. making sales is all company care about by the end of the day, your argument wouldn't fly to those companies. you have to say that you buy everything, and you never pirate, as all of your entertainment is part of your purchases anyway. as any of your actions doesn't take away future sales.
I wouldn't be surprised if after Nintendo wins this lawsuit (and if they win) that they would go around and start sue-ing tons and tons of other companies too. Maybe their next target is Temtem.
Well, Pocketpair now have ****you money thanks to their unprecedented success, so with the backing of Sony they might decide to challenge this extremely flimsy case even though it'll cost more in legal fees than it would to simply settle. From Sony's perspective it might be worth footing the bill to achieve dominance over Nintendo on this one as it opens up huge challenge potential to Pokemon in a broad range of formats. This is now about so much more than just Palworld the game.
Temtem would be safe as that IP never expanded to the scale of The Pokemon Company. Palworld has way more potential even compared to IPs such as Yokai watch.
@@Super_Tristan1005their patent isn’t even valid in the US yet, and likely won’t be accepted in the US. Japan doesn’t seem to have the same rules for defending patents based on previous patent suits in Japan over game mechanics.
@@DarthAnimal Ahh so it's fear mongering when someone brings up another comparable example to Palworld that wasn't attacked by Nintendo purely because TemTem didn't make even a fraction of what Palworld did. Stop deep throating Nintendos cock in replies to every comment please.
This just feels like a dirty move that sets a possible precedent for other companies to just go and patent any mechanic possible just to not get sued. Or Sue those who have a marginal success to get a cut of the pie. But what I am wondering. Because this is a lawsuit in Japan, aimed at a Japanese Patent. Would someone who has a game with similar mechanics (E.g. Ark Survival Evolved) be at risk of any lawsuit if they choose not to release their game in Japan.
I read some when I saw Sega suing some mobile game company right after nintendo also sue palword. Some people said there is a patent for features like "leveling multiple skills at once" and "some form item synthesis". There's one I read that it's almost a quest/task reward with notification of completion. patent code JP5806789B1 One of sega patent JP5930111B2 , I used the google patent to read them.
Another video I watched on the subject had posited this case isn't "Nintendo v. Palworld" nor "Nintendo v. PocketPair", but is instead "Nintendo v. Sony" by proxy and the motive dates back to the Nintendo-Sony fallling out in the early '90s. The two had once partnered to make a console with a CD reader, but Nintendo backed out after realizing Sony was using the partnership to get Nintendo under their thumb-an unfortunately common method of unofficial acquisitions in Japan.
this whole palworld lawsuit is where i draw the line at supporting nintendo in any way shape or form. legally they can protect their ip but this is just beyond scummy. all they care about is money and it shows. otherwise they wouldnt be going after fan games and fan projects. yes pal world isnt a fangame but the fact is that nintendo is beyond anti-consumer to where they make companies like gamestop look like saints in comparison. they probably dont even care how they look to their fans anymore otherwise they wouldnt be doing this scummy behavior.
@@DarthAnimal They ask for that little amount so that PocketPair will be more likely to settle and set the precedent that Nintendo can do this. Then Nintendo would be able to do this with more competitors.
Pocket pair MUST fight this case. Depending on the court of law, aka the country the case is being brought in front of, PP would be required to face lawsuits in every country where Palworld was distributed. That $33K U.S. for this singular case turns into an exponential amount based on the ruling of the judge. If PP does not fight this lawsuit: They will be opening up civil lawsuits in the future for not only themselves, but it would open up the financial incentives for civil lawsuits against ALL FUTURE game devs who personally distribute a game that even ‘slightly’ resembles an existing game. STAND YOUR GROUND POCKET PAIR!!!
10:29 Patents should be readily available blueprints for ALL to use for FREE, to advance technology. Not some hack way to make some extra money. A patent is supposed to be an BADGE OF HONOR for a creator, inventor, researcher, etc.
Patents exist to protect inventors and their investments from other huge players in the field who would would steal their work. If you let everyone use patents freely, you are basically stealing all the R&D someone else did. It would kill innovation.
If Palworld wants to play Nintnedo's game they could patent the function to have a party of characters in the user's possession, files it, and sue Nintendo for infringement (unless a patent for that already exists)
I don't know what is going to happen but interesting that palworld revealed it, and I wonder what is on the nintendo side, and if they are in a court, wonder if they will show the court proceeding
11:10 I remember on the Amiga there was the games Skidmarks (1993) and Super Skidmarks (1995) that had a Pong game you could play during the loading sections.
I find this to be an alarming trend. There is a very similar situation happening in the 3d printing world. Stratasys a very large company, is suing Bambu Labs for violation of patents. Stratasys is a very large and very old company with lots of old patents but it turns out all the patents mentioned in the suit were filed very recently in the world of 3d printing and the features and functions in question have been standard features of almost all printers for many years before the patent approvals. Yet they are currently only going after one particular company that so happens to be the fastest growing in the their space.
That's basic strat of the patent troll playbook, hit the little targets first, they can't afford the fight, set precedence and keep going up the food chain to bigger and bigger targets as your momentum grows and your precedent strengthens.
I know nothing from the 3D printing world, but from what you described, Stratasys is looking to be laughed out of court. Which, in the topic of this video, I hope that the patents being filed recently is enough to back Palworld in this lawsuit.
@@brvndxnl Unfortunately that's not how it works (in the US at least). Most businesses will weigh up the cost of the legal fight vs the cost of settling. Settling a case is by far the most common scenario here due to how expensive the legal fights are. The only time companies will proceed with the legal fight is if they see settling as an ongoing cost to their business, and usually it isn't as the patent troll will go after a different target next.
That doesn’t spell good for future 3d printer businesses. I was thinking of making one myself too. So many people want stuff 3d printed. Just not enough people willing to print.
@@asmosisyup2557 Bambu Lab is not based in the US, they are a Chinese company, though I can't say exactly how this would influence the potential outcome
Ubisoft retroactively patenting Assassins Creed's "Unlock tower to expose map" idea and slamming zelda would be hilarious as a consequence to this lawsuit if it works
it might be the only way Ubisoft can make money right now considering how many of their games have tanked lately
someone needs to get them to do it, and get it into courts before this goes away.
Hopefully something so stupid doesn't happen again. Game mechanics that are fun and engaging should be free for all developers to use. The fact that freedom is this restricted is a really sad thing for everyone who makes or plays games.
Mudrunner/Snowrunner have the same mechanic. Id be a little surprised if AC was the first to do that
I'm gonna patten press button to do action
Seems pretty obvious that Nintendo wants to create an environment where they can have a monopoly over a game genre, hopefully a judge can see how damaging this would be for the games industry as a whole. Pokemon games specifically have been very lazy in innovation and quality and Nintendo got mad when another company gave players what they wanted. Extremely petty which as we all know, is Nintendo's MO
It's a Japanese Judge, Palworld is already screwed.
Palworld is basically Donald Trump, and Pokemon is basically the Democrat party. People get what they want, they went crazy because of it.
@@river-t4y bro you just described a monopoly.
@@Beerbottles123 And Pocketpair is a Japanese company as well. Get your xenophobia out of here
Unfortunately, it's a Japanese judge. The case is doomed.
*Guy who made Pong*
" I am sueing everyone for my patent of two lines interacting with an object"
Been saying that since this whole debacle started. Atari is about to become a quadrillionaire company over night. "Oh you moved your "character/controlled item on screen? PAY UP!"
And to the guy that invented Bertie the Brain, two years after WW2, 20 years before Pong, can sue everyone for videogames that use electricity to power their games.
Im suing everyone for my patent of two lines diverging from an object
Throwing an object in 3D space in order to capture creatures? The description is too broad, the same can also applies to numerous Fishing Games
Also applies to some Minecraft mods like the mob tamer mod, throw an egg at a mob capture it then use it later
@@eonaalythia8525 Please go read the contents of the actual patent, not the abstract. Every single Nintendo patent that they used to sue palworld is 20 thousand+ words long so they are anything but broad. They are so specific that it is hard to read even for lawyers. There is a reason those cases take multiple years. The patent you mention is not that simple because you can't patent something like that.
No it doesnt, please learn how patents work. The object has to capture a creature, release a creature, and start a battle, all from the same mechanic. Let me know when a fishing game starts a battle when you cast a line
@@DarthAnimal well technically struggling to reel in a fish can be considered a battle, as you’re fighting to catch the fish, also in Palworld you don’t start battles the same way you do in Pokémon, you attack the pal or the pal attacks you
Sega about to come after Nintendo for Sega Bass Fishing
Nintendo trying to get PalWorld / PocketPair for Patent Infringement is hilarious to me.
Back when Super Mario 64 was being developed, one developer found out that SEGA held patents to 3D Cameras and Camera Switching, Mid-Development and they were scared that SEGA would take action. Nothing happened, SEGA didn't really care and didn't even take action against them. Mario 64 was a smash hit and everyone was happy.
Sidenote: I am happy to list some sources about this.
actually, could I have the sources? I wanna do a bit of digging myself
@@CreeperMind89 There's an article by Pixeltron Called: The Making Of Super Mario 64 - full Giles Goddard interview which mentions this
And Did you Know Gaming's Super Mario 64 Ft. Seth Everman.
Is that hilarious? It shows that Nintendo has been aware of this for years, and just because a competitor or themselves had not exercised their rights, does not mean that could not always do it.
From what ive heard this was a pretty widely done thing in the old days of video games in japan. Companies were worried what might happen if patent trolls bought up every little function and item you could use for a video game to essentially hold a monopoly or at least get royalties on any game released, so many bought up these mechanics themselves with a sorta gentlemens agreement to not use them on each other. Nintendo even faced this tactic being used on them before. But seems now suddenly when their biggest franchise faces some actual competition they arnt feeling so gentlemanly anymore.
Ok but imagine they acted on it now just for funnies and to put Nintendo in their place
I have no idea if anyone has pointed this out or not. But World of Warcraft has "Battle Pets," where you.
1. Find pets out in the world.
2. 'interact' with them.
3. Take turns using 'abilities' to lower the opponents health points.
4. Can be captured and that capture has a chance to fail.
5. You can't Capture Pets when fighting other people (Trainers?)
6. The lower the Health of the opponent, the higher capture chance.
So I have no clue what is going on, since that has been in World of Warcraft since Mist of Pandaria in Sept 25th, 2012.
this is only in japan court it seems. im't not a lawyer not really sure what is going on there.
@@pencilcheck but according to this patent WoW owners can sue Nintendon't in international court and win the case.
The answer is Sony. Palworld is Sony's attempt as taking the Pokemon pie for itself
blizzard or rather microsoft is a american company, Sony will never try to sue a major american coorperation that they know they cannot win on or has to spend millions upon millions on legal fees.
Nintendo would have to be mental to think that Microsoft wouldn't rip them a new asshole if they tried this on them.
If it’s like other cases, Pocket Pair may need to file a separate suit to try and have the patents invalidated and only then have the main case blocked or overturned, depending on where it gets to and the verdict.
ye thats gonna happen
Video games as a creative endeavor are a form of artistic creation. Saying it's okay to patent systems within video games is the equivalent of patenting oil paintings, and saying it's not okay for anybody to use oil-based paints. And that's not even talking about the predatory nature of how they specifically targeted business competitors in an attempt to build towards a monopoly.
Unfortunately games are corporate and very anti-consumer so it's likely if palworld bows down and settles it's gonna create a giant cascading wave of lawsuits and rushes to patent mechanics either to create various monopolies, or just to be petty to their competition. It's pathetic.
Except you can patent oil-based paints if you have a specific mixture/composition that gives your oil painting an unique look or difference to other oil painting. Oil painting is just the video game, not the game system in the video game, that is the wrong analogy. If you have a special paintbrush or paint roller for painting that you created, you can patent that too. Again, it is not that you cannot use oil-based painting, you just can't use that specific unique brand/mixture that was patented by the inventor. Morality and ethics is just a separate discussion to the actual patent use.
Would a better analogy be something like specific painting techniques? Like wet-on-wet or something? Idk.
Yours works. Just didn't sound right in my head I guess.
This is true but you have to imagine some boomer judge adjudicating this case. Will he care about video games as an art form? I'm not optimistic
But they are also software and technology, which can be patented. A more apt comparison would be to patent a specific oil paint that can dry in minutes as opposed to regular oil paint, and a technology like that deserves to be patented if invented.
"The law is not necessarily about who is in the right."
That's the truth bomb right there that more people need to understand.
The law tells you what is legal not what is moral.
@@coolyeh1017 i never understood that statement as laws were created with moral reasoning in the beginning as to figure out what was wrong and what was right which was then somehow twisted to what is legal and illegal. Heres an example of why that confuses me the law can say ending a life is legal and protecting a person is illegal even though that is morally backwards see what i mean?
@@Tm-dy2bp both true and false. Laws, while initially are based on moral consensus of a group of people, lose all moral basis when they have to actually be ratified in to any law system. Especially so in a boreoarctic hellhole that is modern day legal speak and beurocracy
@@Tm-dy2bp laws where created by people. worse, by politicians. they are most likely as corrupt as the worst of those involved in their creation.
@@gampie13
Great for corruption. Even better for Evil to bend it as Divinity.
I read that Nintendo got their Japanese patent fast-tracked, which is why it was approved while the U.S. patent is still pending. It would make sense, essentially that they file so many valid patents that they become a "trustworthy applicant", but that they're abusing that position now for various reasons.
I don't think patents should ever be fast-tracked because it invites issues like this, but Japan seems to think otherwise.
Ah, the Japanese patent office was playing favorites. Hopefully Pocketpair can take advantage of it.
@@Novouto The Japanese government and its myriad organisations do have a nice little bias for one of their golden geese.
doesn't really matter they are trying to patent things that have been used by dozens of games over the past 30+ years, hell THEY stole the idea for the mechanic from a 1960's anime. Pretty much falls under the same perveyance that words do you cannot patent them because they are understood to be used common place. The "mechanics" Nintendo patended are common place AF in games.. thousans of games run affoul of this patent.
@@bdhale34 I don't think you understood my comment, so I'll reiterate the points you seem to have missed.
1: Nintendo may have a trusted relationship with the Japanese Patent Office.
2: Nintendo seems to have fast-tracked a patent that never should have been filed, suggesting they're abusing this trust.
@@BioGenx2b I just wanna see Nintendo trying to sue Chunsoft, Heartbeat, Level-5 and Square Enix for "patent infringement" in Dragon Quest and getting eaten alive by the public
Time to race down to the patent office to protect the mechanic I just thought of: “Propelling a player controlled object or character off of a surface.”
You forgot to add the term "virtual"
You also have to think about the wording after the 5 milllion yen stating "plus additional damages" which is obscure and could be an insanely high undetermined amount.
The 5m is the carrot, the "additional damages" is the stick. They want a settlement that blocks pocketpair from continuing to make palworld games and the threat of damages if they go to trial is their way of getting there.
I hope that they are countersued for 100 million dollars not yen. Nintendo are acting like scum.
They are seeking an injunction as well. Which would halt sales. The damage is moot vs being told you can't sell it anymore.
@ShivaTD420 would ut just be active in Japan the injunction.. and say could some us company sue over the mounts part and force alot of Nintendo out of the us?
"Plus late payment damages to Pokemon Company and Nintendo" which if you can pay the 5 million all at once it would be such a small amount that its unimportant
An interesting stance that sony could also take is "if pocket pair wins this and is successful, our partnership could allow us to literally obtain / support a competitor for one of nintendo's most popular IP's and have that on our console", literally a huge golden goose, though that would require significant foresight and intelligence on sony's part, which par for the course right now is unlikely, but still technically possible.
With Sony and their new Astrobot game, I can see this very likely (the similarities to Nintendo platformers is wild). Sony has no game in the monster genre iirc, so this is their titular IP for this genre.
I just saw a video about the lawsuit and basically the world of big business in Japan is very cutthroat and devious and this simple acquisition by Sony is putting pressure on Nintendo with their IP
Even the chance of going band for band against Nintendo is why they're doing the lawsuit
I could be wrong on this, but IIRC i saw somewhere that pocket pair confirmed that they will be fighting this all the way through and not settling with sonys help and funding, because they had just secured a licence deal for there next game to be a ps4/5 exclusive for the first 6 months or something along those lines. So If I am correct on that your on the right track.
@@ZombieKitty321 I don't think it was securing a license deal for that. Sony music is partnering with palworld to make merch, nothing about their next game being ps5 exclusive. Infact, another company is trying to get the rights to make a palworld mobile game, sooooo yeah.
If palworld dropped a "legal fee help" dlc that is just a goofy skin or something easy to implement I'd buy it to support it
@@Leagoless Make it a burnt/dirty baseball cap called the Ashy hat or something.
I would totally get it. Haven’t been super interested in palworld recently, but I highly despise how Nintendo does stuff like this. Pokémon has felt very dry as of late, but the only reason I play it is their games are more accessible while I’m away from my gaming PC.
I like what Palworld brings. It’s a slightly darker take on Pokémon type concepts with a more open world feel that appeals to both older audiences and younger ones. Pokémon games don’t quite interest me story wise since they are so formulaic, and feel so child like. (No issue with child like usually, but I grew out of Pokémon and because they don’t add anything new the child like approach feels more insulting than anything.)
They should sell a "Screw nintendo" line of dlc clothing line for like a dollar each.. i would sooo buy them all 😂😂😂
Bonus points if it's a Lovander accessory/skin
Tbh i think we need to berid of the entire pattent system. Another youtuber, Jörg Sprave, expressed his grievances with patents long ago. He's an inventor so patents exist to protect him, and yet he has been burned before where companies just steal what he has created and he cant afford to fight them. I think its a system that is way too easy to game. I think its archaic, and it made sense 2 - 300 years ago when there were a lot less people and a lot more inventors. I think patents now only exist so companies can pull shit like this.
Only the USA and Japan (of the relevant countries) allow patents on game mechanics, all other countries have realized that it's utter bullshit and should not be patentable. Patents have their place, but not within gaming.
Agreed. On the whole. Patents are no longer appropriate for a world based around such ruthless capitalism
patents ONLY protect people from other people abusing the patent system ... if the patent system didnt exist then no one would need protecting in the first place ... its litterally create the problem to sell the solution BUT in legal realm
On the issue of an expensive legal battle, there's one idea I don't see being discussed - Palworld has an *immense* amount of public goodwill that Nintendo have burned with this disgustingly predatory lawsuit, and especially since this case is so high-profile: Crowdfund the legal battle. Make it very public that you're fighting a patent that would murder game creativity, allow people to donate to your defense. Even if the money doesn't make that much of a difference, Nintendo will get absolutely eviscerated in the court of public opinion.
Sort of? While in the West the goodwill seems a bit burned. Nintendo has a lot of goodwill in the country where the lawsuit is happening, Japan.
Over there the prevailing narrative is that PocketPair purposefully provoked Nintendo and must have done something wrong to obtain Nintendo's ire to the point they filed a patent lawsuit of all things. Furthermore, many Japanese, especially indie developers, saw PocketPair's initial statement about the lawsuit arrogant and disrespectful due to the word choice as PocketPair used aggressive and crude language instead of formal language suggesting that they are not professional. Regardless of what you or I think word choice and respect rules Japanese culture. The language saying that PocketPair will fight on behalf of all indie developers rubbed many Japanese the wrong way. As such most people in Japan (at least those who are aware of the lawsuit) are rooting for Nintendo or neutral about the case with few cheering on PockerPair's side.
only outside of japan, the japanese public is on Nintendo's side.
@@sinep8008 They have been good little corporate slaves since the U.S. subjugated them post WW.
@@coolyeh1017 I'd say that since this lawsuit is likely to set a precedent for game companies all over the world the public opinion of people outside of Japan is just as relevant as those inside of Japan. It would be very interesting to see how much PocketPair could crowdfund their side of the legal battle, especially if it was mostly or entirely funded by overseas fans.
those lawsuits are decided by people in yachs, they dont care about public goodwill and this whole situation wouldn't happen if they cared about public goodwill
It's so funny to see this issue coming up... especially since I remember playing Zanzarah: The Hidden Portal over two decades ago. The main game loop included a FPS component where you would fight Fairies (using your own Fairies) and then capture them with ball-like objects by throwing it at them... that game was released by THQ in 2002.
didint make as much money as palworld im sure, and in 2002 there wasnt the buzz that was created with palworld. they are only doing this as revenge, not as an actual legitimate concern over patents. also holy shit 2002 was 22 years ago....damn i feel old.
Omg, I did love that game! Completely forgot about that. Although you have to admit, that Pokemon was already a worldwide phenomenon at that point and one could argue, that Funtastics Development was "inspired" by Pokemon. Also, if I remember correctly, battle was within a seperate arena, not on the world map, like in the older pokemon games.
Yooo another Zanzarah fan! What a hidden gem that was.
Vinesauce TH-cam comments are roasting Pirate Software 😂
What did he do to get them mad?
The devs of Jade Cacoon can also come after Nintendo for creature capture
I agree with Thor. This is really horrible. This lawsuit saddens me as a consumer and disheartens me as an aspiring indie game developer.
I sincerely hope PocketPair fights and wins this lawsuit. Because if Nintendo wins this lawsuit then it will basically tell other game companies that it’s okay to patent mechanics. And then the game industry will turn into this landscape of companies, divided by who own patents to specific mechanics and it will, as Khronos and Thor said, make it basically impossible for indie devs to exist. The game industry will turn into Avatar the Last Airbender with Nintendo being Fire Lord Sozin.
This lawsuit is a tipping point for the game industry.
There is no way Pocketpair can win given how Japanese law works as it is.
Now, if you all can make them suffer from the sheer amount of negative reaction...
@@atreidestrooper It's really going to depend on if Sony decides to back Pocket Pair. They were starting to invest in the company and Palworld. It's probably what caught Nintendo's eye.
If Pocket Pair gets access to Sony's war chest we might see this get really ugly.
Patenting game mechanics is already a thing. Want to do something like the Nemesis system from Shadow of War/Shadow of Mordor games? Nope, patented. Want to have a minigame during a loading screen? Nope, also patented.
Japan has a broken legal system that is severely behind even the third world in most aspects.
More than likely PocketPair may lose, but that doesn't necessarily means that this would fly in other jurisdiction across the planet.
As I said, Japan has one of the worst legal system on Earth, so no need to feel doom out of this.
@@Vanreis It wasn't patented due to being a game mechanic, it was patented as innovative technology. The argument is different.
Feels like pal world should crowdfund for fighting this. I think the gaming community would absolutely fund lawyer's fees
@@andrewdarby8843 agreed, as a community all gamers have a chance to make thier opinion heard and change gaming for the better by supporting the opinion they agree with.
As much as I agree with you. As mentioned in the video, they are asking for an absurdly low amount for a reason. A crowdfund isn't going to even make a dent in the overall cost in legal fee's which will be in the millions or even 10's of millions. Also the judge might order Palworld to cease operations while the court case is ongoing, which would halt their profits. Which could be as short as a year or 2 or as long as 15 years. I really do hope they fight it.
Y'know, there was a really great video by Moon Channel called that talks about the complicated dynamics at play here, which includes some very interesting explanations of the dynamics between independent Dojinshi (which means self-published work for those who don't know otherwise, I know some people think it means exclusively something else...) and big companies and publishers. Doujin circles frequently create works that violate copyright, and even with the lack of Fair Use in Japanese law, big companies frequently ignore them, which is this sort of social contract. If some independent work gets too big, people pull it down, because it threatens the social contract that allows the freedom independent creators have to create whatever they want. This is why when Nintendo announced they were suing Palworld, many Japanese people supported Nintendo, they assume that Palworld has broken that social contract. My comment cannot explain all of the nuances of his video, I recommend people watch it for the full explanation.
EDIT: It also goes into how this lawsuit is not Nintendo vs Palworld, it is Nintendo vs Sony, the video goes into that dynamic too, its really interesting.
Why does it matter? This was not side project, this was commercial from the start. There is no such contract for video games
I watched the same video. The other information that stuck out to me was that Sony was involved. Sony and Nintendo have bad blood when Nintendo backed out of the Nintendo PlayStation project (right?).
@@PBDog24 Yeah, that's right. Moon Channel stated that this could be Sony attempting to get back at Nintendo.
@@Oblivion4eg Sorry, I don't really get what you are trying to say here. Could you rephrase?
@@meep7605 social contract doesn't matter because there is no such contract for video games in the first place. They don't own artstyle. What japanese say on this doesn't matter
"Would you like to tell chat your credentials."
Servant of the Secret Fire
Wielder of the Flame of Anor
7:45 PocketPair may not be owned by Sony legally, but in terms of Japan's corporate culture, Sony is PP's belligerent big brother that PP will struggle to say no to. Sony helping PP here is comparable to in the 90s when Nintendo helped GameFreak and that led to Nintendo controlling the company and Pokemon IP without technically owning it
Gen 2 was supposedly the last gen, but the IP got big and with the founding of TPC we got the formulaic release of the rest of the pokemon gens. In the Gamecube era this was apparent, notably with Colosseum and XD being gen 2 games despite Ruby & Sapphire being 2 years old games at that point. Gen 3 is also when they got another pokemon designer besides Ken Sugimori.
Palworld might be safe from that as they are partnered with Sony music group rather than Sony entertainment. Pocketpair also reassured that the partnership will keep them as an indie studio despite the big names.
I mean if it would mean Pocketpair winning the legal battle it would be worth it. Nothing in life comes free. Every decision is at the cost of something else. I think Pocketpair making Nintendo suffer and defending their IP worth it. They made half a billion dollars (gross) off Palworld. They've proven they know how to make a good product.
@@D3adCl0wn That was a bit of a misunderstanding, gen 2 was hugely successful but they were already concerned with kids losing interest. The Gamecube games were Nintendo's attempt at both a console Pokemon game as well as more mature titles aimed at those older kids and teens. There was also the GBA/Gamecube link cable they wanted to show off.
Game Freak sold substantial portions of Pokemon to both Nintendo and Creatures Inc. Even when TPC was formed, before Pokemania set in, they were struggling to keep the lights on. Its not the same situation as with Palworld. If Sony were to swoop in to rescue them however things could potentially change, they could be the next SquareEnix.
I am so glad he mentioned Shadows of Mordor because that was such an amazing game the fact that they prevented other people from using that mechanic has stunted the growth of the gaming community
Pokémon was inspired by concepts that first arose from the Shin Megami Tensei Series by Atlus and Dragon Quest V by Square Enix.
Hypocrisy much?
Yep Dragon Quest 5 Had Monster Capturing and Fighting 4 Years before Pokemon.
Dragon Quest 5 Released in 1992 and the First Pokemon in 1996.
Where they patented? It would be hypocritical only if they were.
Taking inspiration from is not the same thing as patent infringment. Be serious, I expected better from this community
@@AfutureVno, no it wouldn’t be.
This seems so detached of some people because games, but how’s this.
You invent a hand spade, but the trowel exists, you’re now getting sued by the inventor of the spade for the ACT of digging with a hand tool.
Or the automobile club going after Henry ford for his car sales. Horrible man he may have been, if he lost that suit, it’d be a handle of companies not simply selling cars, but practically owning the mere concept of a combustion engine driven, four wheeled vehicle.
This is modern Nintendo either forgetting their own past, or actively going and saying, “We can do this, but only us, no one else. If you borrow, or copy, or innovate from us like we originally did from them, you have done wrong, but it’s fine when we did it, no matter how close we were to the mechanic’s of those we took from.”
Patented back then or not, it’s incredibly hypocritical, scummy, and corrupt.
@@nameoftheedgyvariety4988 I fail to see how it is hypocrisy at all. Nintendo has never said or acted the way you claimed.
For them to be hypocritical, they would have to have willingly infringed on someone's patent and now turn around and demand people respect their parents. Anything else is just you confusing inspiration with infringement.
An important thing to know re: prior art.
Non-patented prior art renders a patent invalid, HOWEVER only patented prior art is typically reviewed during patent application. That prior art has to be brought up in an infringement or invalidation lawsuit, at very high cost. Some say that patent offices have an incentive to do this, as it incentivizes people to register more patents and hence get them more money.
Timing is everything. Under USA Patent Law, Patents are never retroactive nor broad sweeping. While the Patent Holder must check if the technology is not already made by another.
Among other factors.
Long regulation short... These Patents won't survive in USA Courts even if it was filed.
It's not innovative nor hyper specific. Since USA Patents do not give ownership to the concept.
Nintendo is updating a prior patent. I described it as claiming the interior of a house because you got a foot in a door.
Vinesauce TH-cam comment section is roasting Pirate Software.
What happened?
This lawsuit seems like, in my opinion, like a teacher's kid coming up to you on the playground, who already has a Gameboy, saying you stole their Gameboy and having the teacher give your Gameboy to them. 😡
bro are you just telling a story that happened to you
@zambsDGOW Yeah, I had something similar happen to me, but with a Transformer. One that my dad had played with when he was a kid. I brought it over to someone's house. That person said their grandparent bought it for them. The parents even said that they saw him open the toy in front of them.
@@Drachenkonig2 Hate when that happens. My condolences for that happening for you, mate. Hopefully they got their comeuppance.
Something similar happened to me lol. I wonder if this happens a lot
Something similar literally happened at the school I went to. A boy had a portable CD player in his bag, and a girl saw it and wanted it. She told the teacher it was hers, and the teacher forced the boy to give the player to the girl without doing anything to verify the ownership of the CD player. Teacher didn't even call any parents. Fortunately, the boy's parents found out and decided to raise hell until the school forced the girl to return the stolen item. School literally promoting theft.
One additional thing, while it's not the same mechanic, Ark uses balls to store your dinosaurs and move them easily around. The taming mechanic doesn't match, but the sending/retrieving mechanic does in the exact same way with Pokémon and Palworld and Ark was in early access since 2014-2015. The item in particular was added in the Extinction expansion iirc was 2018-2019.
nintendo inventing a new meta
with this one court glitch you can skip the consumer alltogether
patent trolling and farming isn't a new concept
@@marcogenovesi8570
True... USA Patent Troll is nothing new.
@@marcogenovesi8570 true but this case could set the meta for it, filing patents after the fact and threatening injuction for shake down money
I vow to never buy another Nintendo game if this goes through, I will not put my money in the hands of a company that is using our money, to destroy our video games. If this doesn't go down in the record books as the first time Nintendo lost a lawsuit they initiated, I hope everyone stops investing in this company to show that we don't support their actions.
well....hope in one hand and all that
@@illrhymes2524:00 they were saying it was most likely all Nintendo, and nothing to do with pokémon company.
why "if this goes through"? i've vowed to not give any of my money aanymore with the fact of what these scumbags did.
Shouldn't be an "if" they tried that's enough to not touch their stuff
Overly dramatic much?
Cue House Lannister theme.
I'm a producer at an indie studio and I just wanted to say your vid is a really instructive and insightful overview of this case. It's one I've been following for a while and you covered a couple of points I wasn't familiar with, thank you!
a position I hope to reach in my near future as well. Also consider this quite a sad development in the games industry with where its going.
Nintendo seeing nothing but King Kong 💀
I think there should be laws that prevent companies from being able to drag lawsuits out, because that tactic is nearly always used to drain the poorer of the two of their funds so they can no longer fight.
My friend, Google John Oliver anti slapp laws. THIS is EXACTLY what your after
who cares, the most important is companies suing individuals, if you don't have an entity when they sue the person you have no choice and no protection at all.
@@pencilcheck
Individuals?... Indie Corporations have no financial ability to fight lawsuits at this level even if they are legally in the right.
Individuals often times are not missed by mega Corporations.
@@pencilcheck individuals in this case would be the poorer of the 2. I didn't miss any of them with the statement. Also, to say who cares would make me think you side with the bigger companies because what I said would even the playing field for all parties included.
@@dannym2359 you do know that in law, poor or not, you can always fake bankruptcy for the corporation and the case is closed the real money is still resided at the individuals. Meaning dragging out wouldn't matter to smaller companies, they just need to declare bankrupcy then that's it. but for individuals that is a completely different issue. if you don't know that also shows that you don't know much about how law are actually used at those levels. big companies vs companies means nothing to individuals like us. But to be honest, i'm not sure how your statement is relevent to the case here, palworld is rich now, they partnered with sony, so they have tons of money and can fight it out with nintendo, not sure what is the problem here?
Moon Channel made a good point in that the only reason Nintendo is going after Palworld is because Sony is backing it, and Nintendo considers Sony an existential rival.
Sony or Pocketpair, no matter. Nintendo is literally patent-trolling.
Eh not really there's be never a Sony feud after the failed NS console
Never have the two company's clashed ever
Let's say it's true Nintendo trying to maintain a monopoly crushing a smaller competitor from growing bigger
And they are willing to ruin a small company to do so
Which is why they're pursuing them with patents that PocketPair can fight using games that they themselves have made. People say that Nintendo's legal team always makes perfectly calculated moves but given the context around this, the lawsuit actually feels like a desperate move from Nintendo for once.
@@misaaftonYou realize that business isn't like rap beef? That you didn't hear anything, doesn't mean that there isn't something. Even more so in the Japanese business world.
But even here, ever heard of Nvidia and Apple clashing? Probably not. But you still can't use Nvidia cards with Macs, only AMD/Radeon. Even for their AI stuff - Apple doesn't buy servers that have Nvidia Hardware. There's more little stuff that showed that they basically have beef since their fallout a bit over 10 years ago. On the other side, Nvidia really isn't a company anyone likes to work with 😂. Terribad business partners.
Anyway, I can recommend the moon channel video. It's done by a lawyer too, but he has the advantage of having decent knowledge about the culture of Japanese business relations.
Too bad I'm not a Sony fan, because this has convinced me to not deal with Nintendo ever again. I was already extremely hesitant in the past thanks to their general litigious nature, but I think this solidified my decision.
Didn't realize i was a member 😂 love to the one who gifted it to me during stream ❤
Im with you there, thanks guys!!!
Same
Yeah wha I would of never known if you didn’t post this lol
Am I a member?
Edit:
Oh... I'm not.... so sad 😢
Congrats
I feel like there's at least one good inventive for Pocketpair to fight, and that's an immense amount of goodwill from basically any gamer that isn't in the 'Nintendo can do no wrong' camp.
This lawsuit has a lot of companies that are equally pissed and excited.
What those idiots fail to realise is, that someone else could patent-troll Nintendo right back.
@@1IGG everybody realize that. The problem is the fact it's the consumer that will ultimately pay the price for this. Us gamers will receive worse games as a result that is the entire point of it. Being able to patent a game mechanic should not be allowed.
@@1IGGThis is a big company bullying a smaller company. There is not a company in the video game space that push Nintendo around like Nintendo can push around PocketPair.
what people fail to realize that honestly only a few like square enix and atlus could actually patent troll nintendo as any company outside japan would find it hard as hell. stop acting like studios like ubisoft has a chance to patent troll nintendo when they dont. it would be incredibly stupid to try that on nintendo in japan where any of this could happen. outside japan most attempt would fall on thier ass.
@uiharuhimeji5614 It's like saying you can distribute child pornography internationally because it's legal in your country.
Nintendo doesn't actually like their users, we're just an obstacle between them and our money.
Have you ever played a Nintendo game with a bug? No, because they would never ship something that is not perfect.
There are definitely bugs in Nintendo games. @@evanm2570
@@evanm2570 I saw bugs in Mario and Zelda games wdym 😂 yes, they're harder to find compairing to other games, but never did they release only perfect games.
Most Japanese companies hate their users/fan/customer base. The problem is they know they will make money off them regardless.
That's every company that's for you know profit to those both publicly traded and or private.
This is the equivalent of Microsoft patenting the Doom idea: shooter, where you go around a map killing demons using certain tools. Since idSoftware was one of the first ones developing it, they can get the registration and screw everyone from the date the patent gets the registration.
Imagine Atari patenting the idea of collecting items and using various tools due to their adventure game ADVENTURE.
Problem is that Nintendo isn't the first one to do these mechanics. If anything, based on the game some of the patents are filed on, Pokémon: Acreus, Pocketpair beat Nintendo on those mechanics by releasing Craftopia years before Pokemon: Acreus.
Suddenly, NO MORE FPS GAMES IN JAPAN
The issue with the patent dates in Japan is by design, is due to their "special" type of patents. They're called something like "continuation patent", which means that a patent can "evolve" as a project/prototype evolves, either because some stuff didn't work, or something else was figured out and added to the patent. So those dates that are mentioned are not the "oiginal" patent date, but the date of the filing of the "continuation" of that patent, essentially "updating" it.
So Nintendo got some earlier patents, waited for Palworld to come out, and "updated" said patents based on what they saw Palworld released, so they can do a more obvious claim of patent infringement where the patent was tailor made for litigation. This is possible in Japan, due to their "special" patents. In the US, this claim would not be possible.
There was a video I watched when this all first happened. I don't know if it is 100% the same in Japan, but this lawyer said that they can't go after Craftopia due to the game coming out *before* the "parent" patent. Even though these three came *after* Palworld released, they can still use them as if they are from the time of the parent patent. Something a lot of people don't know about and with a bit of research is interesting. I went down a large rabbit hole in legal stuff once this all started and learned interesting things about patents.
no, we know about it. its a scummy tactic known far and wide. its only a wonder why its even still legal to use in the first place.
@uiharuhimeji5614 Sorry, I should have clarified that the reason I brought up the parent patent is because it was never addressed in the video.
Since Craftopia predates the patent to the point it can't be enforced on Craftopia, I'd think that would mean the patent's invalid to begin with: there's already prior art from someone other than the one filing the patent which can be described by the patent.
This is a copy/paste of a comment I made on another video back when the lawsuit was first filed so the information and wording is a bit dated, but is still relevant and explains the application dates being after Palworld's release:
A Japanese Patent Lawyer by the name of Kurihara wrote an article about this lawsuit. Basically, he said that since the lawsuit was filed jointly by both Nintendo and The Pokemon Company we can assume the lawsuit is regarding one of the 28 patents and 4 divisional patents that are jointly registered by both companies. In case you don't know what a divisional patent is, it's basically a more detailed "child" patent that is enforceable by the "parent" patent's registration date. Additionally, you are able to sue based on each individual divisional patent rather than just the "parent" patent.
All four of those divisional patents were submitted for approval this year (one submitted in July and the others in February and March) and went through a special, sped up examination and all point back to the same "parent" patent from December 2021. The catching mechanic is one of these divisional patents (Patent No. 7545191) with two of the three other divisional patents also having some coloration to the catching of Pokemon while the last is regarding the riding of Pokemon.
Quick Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer, this is just what I read.
Did that Japanese patent lawyer say anything about the odds of either side winning this lawsuit?
@@smashbother5684 No, he just described the original patent as a "killer patent" that would be hard to not infringe upon when making a Pokemon like game. I've also heard, and don't quote me on this, that it's harder to invalidate an already existing patent in Japan than it is in the USA but is still something that can be done. Other articles reference IP "experts" and say litigation may last up to five years.
@@WolftsukiShogun Man, glad pocket pair stocked up on all that money.
They actually patented animal riding? Something that humans have been doing for 5,500 years? I would think that something humans have been doing since the Bronze Age would be too obvious to patent.
Nintendo is mad scummy for this crap.
I heard they only became worried about Palworld after Sony got involved with it
Common Nintendo L
Yup. Instead of getting a few Switch games for Christmas, my kid is getting a small mountain of Steam games.
DMCA'ing fan made gameplay videos
DMCA'ing fan made games
Deleting game stores and making it impossible to buy their older games
Deleting emulators from existence and killing off game preservation.
Making Gary Bowser pay them for life to send a message
...didn't get your attention?
@@The_Cadaver You'll be saving money and the kids are not stuck to using deprecated hardware.
the only good i can see from this is that pal world just got a story update, Japanese shogunate, with each building representing each department in Nintendo's name. With pals representing the latest game they made, for example their Brazilian branch with the pablo leader would use the metroid pal, the Corporate recycling sector being humans disposing of materials in fire burning by fire pals, human resource using people to make conveyor belt items and so on. It has been a long time since I did a research paper on them, but there is a Reddit thread and a fandom showing all the departments of Nintendo, in the Reddit thread they explain the games they are responsible for making and other stories about the game departments.
Any Company **Puts anything in game**
Nintendo **TIME TO PATENT THAT**
Nintendo doesn’t care about the patents or for that matter does it care about Palworld either. What it cares about is Sony getting into its Pokemon merchandise with it own fuzzy monster franchise.
@@Zabzim sooo it cares about palworld then.
More like, Nintendo cares about Palworlds success and wants to stop it.
@ narr, on its own Palworld is a nothing burger. Like retail World of Warcraft has pet collecting/battling and Nintendo isn’t going after them. No this is about Nintendo and its old adversaries Sony over the future of Pokemon. Which to be honest is a good thing as Pokemon of late has become generic and stale so having a competitor like the Palworld Company will force them to make a better game.
Anyone remember when Namco Patented loading games.... that's why we got all those 3D turn arounds and slide shows of 'hints and tips' instead of having little mini games to play during the loading screens. Loading games have been around since the middle of the 80's, way before Namco filed their patent for them in 1994! Apparently no one wanted to go through the process of challenging the patent back then. In this case what's being patented is much more core to the game's gameplay. So I hope they fight it
11:11
We need a gofundme for palworld's legal fees just to help set positive precedent
The high seas is the only place for Nintendo games from this day on.
-Ex Nintendo fan
As far as im concerned thier pokemon games can be thrown into the trash since they have only gotten shittier and shittier as time goes on.
This reeks of just bad lawyering. The lawyers likely found that the designs weren't actually similar enough to warrant a lawsuit and wouldn't bring on a copyright case. For some reason, Nintendo or the Pokemon Co didn't want to drop the case, so instead the lawyers are trying to exploit a legal loophole in the gaming industry, which is patenting. Because typically videogames aren't patented by mechanic, it hasn't really set a precedent on a large scale. But if Nintendo succeeds, the issue isn't how restrictive their patent would be, but rahter that it would open the floodgates for other companies like microsoft and EA to follow suit. This would end in a legal war that would implode itself, as mechanics in videogames should be under a creative license, not a patent, meaning that there would be no way to enforce a patent.
Id be suprised to see that from microsoft but if its happened before could you give some details?
@@joshellis53 I didn't suggest that microsoft would do that, I'm saying it would open the precedent for companies LIKE microsoft to follow the same. Being able to hold a monopoly on a videogame mechanic would be insane, and seems like the thing a corporation would try to do to monetize gaming more.
Nintendo didn't even consider Palworld a threat at all until half a year later when the game made hundreds and hundreds of millions. It's cutting into their future titles and business so now they're gonna bully the less beloved company. It's straight up scare tactics.
If they succeed in this I'm just permanently just boycotting Nintendo products. Pokémon has grown stale for years regardless because of how safe and monotonous they've gotten. Competition is the greatest way to breed creativity especially in the artistic fields such as gaming. They could just make a better game and make EVEN MORE money. But no, because it's cutting into their profits they're gonna be petty and bully the industry...and effectively set it back by decades. If people start to just exclude mechanics because various companies throw patents around for game mechanics? I hope pocket pair doesnt settle and bow down, and they win.
@@elijahpark5344 Well... EA has already started suing other games from using gatcha mechanics and loot boxes that EA has apparently patented. This was in the news while ago but didn't arouse further discussion.
@@mwbwyatt I agree with this. I can't support a company that engages in literal mafia/yakuza behavior.
one thing we may not want to forget is the fact that palworld is working alongside sony, who is a notable rival and long ago enemy of nintendo (source, theres a video going into the history of japan's side of the lawsuit)
they formed partnership to push anime for palworld, that is the real threat.
@@pencilcheckbald eagle pfp detected, opinion voided :P
@@redpepper74 :O
they were once at the start friendly until nintendo backed out of the playstation project and the playstation released was a success and they been enemies since. TLDR: they are enemies/rivals now WHOLLY because of nintendos backstabbing. its fully deserved. comeupperance comes for us all. Karma's a bitch and always will be.
@@uiharuhimeji5614 well, the social contract thing is a thing in japan as well, you can also read it as a trap from sony
There are fees for late payment, so the cost is actually a few million dollars USD, not just the 70k. Also, i must say... people are reporting this on gaming news sites by saying they are suing for COPYRIGHT infringement... Seen at least 3 stories where they get that detail wrong.
People even in the comments on this video frequently interchange and confuse trademark, copyright, and patent. It is sort of why we pay the big lawyers who spend years studying law school, taking the bar (and patent bar), and practicing for years to understand and fight with the law. Even then many judges and lawyers get it wrong because the law is very complex and at times ambiguous.
It is already illegal in the US to patent game mechanics, but not for video games,
it is illegal to patent game mechanics for board games/ any physical game or sport.
Even if it's not the case for vidya, the Supreme Court would very likely determine they fall under a similar category of activity and as such this law is applicable to videogames as well
It was explained to me that the new patents are actually divisional patents. Meaning it was aspects of an old patent that was stripped out of the original patent and thus share the old start date and timeframe from the original patent. Purpose meaning they can push only that one small part of a patent and if the divisonal dies in the courts the main one stays safe.
For the most part, yes. JP is one of the most restrictive jurisdictions, but setting that aside, if you have a live application and a target, you will file continuations / divisionals (distinction not important in this case). One part, as you said, is to keep something alive that is not in the case, but mostly it cuts down on litigation costs because you tailor the language of your claims (the only thing you can enforce) to map onto the target as strongly as possible.
doesnt explain why they were allowed to keep super Vague shit intact though. as patents in mechanics have to be pretty precise which none of these patents thier using are. iirc the warner bros had to do quite a few changes to finally get thier patent for nemesis to go through. kudos to them for attempting so much and finally got it secured but it sucks for the industry though.
@@uiharuhimeji5614 I am a patent attorney and I implore you to stop posting so confidently about a system with which you are so unfamiliar.
I was going to try to explain what's wrong in your reply, but I've taken a look at your other comments on this video and you are so misinformed that there's not enough space to explain to you how the patent system works.
For example, it doesn't matter whether a patent troll is in Japan because a patent can be asserted against Nintendo in any jurisdiction that grants the patent (patents cover make, use, or sale of infringing products regardless of where the company is based) and a gamecube game would be considered prior art as most, if not all, jurisdictions have a global reach for any public disclosures older than 1 year from the priority date (although I think JP requires absolute novelty as of the priority date).
This whole situation just sucks.
One question I have from this: is it even possible for the corporate world to actually have a soul?
Not really. At least in the US, patent law requires patent holders to defend their patents or risk losing them.
If there's shareholders involved, no.
@davidcozziii the main thing is this is moreso Japanese patent isn't it? Not US. Which is an entirely different beast
Japanese corporations? No. Remember Fukushima? Corporate heads from Japan refused to shut those reactors down.
Corporations are legally required to maximize profit for shareholders by whatever means necessary, including illegal means if the profit outweighs the cost of lawsuits.
I'll add again. I think the game mechanics patent question was answered in the table top gamming space when the owners of DnD could not sue for the use of mechanics. They could for use of their monsters and characters and art.
That is US information but yeah it should be world standard and apply to patents as well as copyright
Yesnt you can for some mechanics but it's extremely limited in terms of actually getting approved
I could actually see this case ending up in international patent courts
Imagine how bad it would be if DnD had managed to patent gameplay mechanics. We wouldn't have all the great RPG games we have now, even World of Warcraft wouldn't have been possible. Literally every RNG mechanic in RPG games comes from DnD.
I don’t think Nintendo is even trying to win the suit. They just want to put Pocketpair out of business.
they are only asking for 60k tho. Nintendo wants to win because if they do then they set precident to attempt to screw over everyone else
Aren't there entire genres that wouldn't exist if you could patent game mechanics? I'm not a Palworld fan, but this isn't about Nintendo v Palworld. This is bigger then that and that's really important to bring up.
Thanks for covering it. I figured you'd have a more nuanced take about why this is bad then just doomsday, which it definitely is feeling a bit like a game dev doomsday
Patent says 'throwing' in a 3D environment.
Palworld should add a joke update where they 'kick' the palsphere
palworld futbol edition
Quick mod it in
that would make a cool throw animation to add variety!
OR they could've just NOT deliberately antagonized them by ripping off Pokeballs. There's a REASON literally every other game in the genre used their OWN ideas instead of ripping off the concept of pokeballs.* I mean, come on now. It's not even INSPIRED by it. They just used a synonym for pokeballs!
"It's not pocket monsters, it's purse creatures!" That's basically what they did, but worse. They deliberately antagonized them, and it may ruin the entire genre as a result.
*Discs ,crystals, magnets, conversations, etc. All sorts of options and they went with NONE of them. They KNEW what they were doing.
@@FF8Irvine_Fanthat’s like getting mad at an artist for using another artist’s technique or style in their art. It’s absurd. Sure I find it a bit on the nose, but to be fair no idea can be entirely original. Would it have been better if it were a box? Still the same concept.
For a better comparison, and how I understand it, it’s like someone using a spacieux colour pallet/type of oil paint and patenting it so other artists cannot use those colors or brands. It’s toxic to the community.
You can patent the art piece, but not the materials used to make it. You can patent the art of the pokeball, but not the mechanics behind it as that sets a weird precedent to other games with similar mechanics. It’s less that Palworld is so super different, but more, if Nintendo wins this, they could potentially wind up making a monopoly over a genre which is not good.
Thank you for mentioning Craftopia. I have brought up Craftopia, and most people are not aware of it
Craftopia isnt applicable to the patent, it doesnt infringe. It doesnt start a battle when the item is used, which is crucial to the patent
@DarthAnimal Neither does Pal World. A battle can start in many ways independent of the capture mechanic.
@@trichkid1536 Throwing your own pal at a creature starts a battle if it connects, Thats the infringing mechanic
@@DarthAnimal You can throw a pal sphere at a creature without initiating battle and capture them. If Craftopia isn't infringing, then Palworld isn't either.
@@soulechelon2643 Did you read the patent? It covers both capturing and battle. Please educate yourself
The hilarity is that filing the lawsuit probably cost Nintendo more than $64k. What Nintendo is attempting to do is illegal under international patent law, but they used a loophole where the original maker did not file for patent and the patent examiners are woefully ill-equipped to evaluate novelty in software. The claims in Nintendo's patents should never have been granted, and if the examiners had been shown actual prior art it never would have been. Evil is rising around the world, and this is just one more example. I have the principles to never buy a Nintendo product again, and I encourage you all to do the same.
I wrote this before listening to whole video, and I'm glad most of the legalese was brought up! 👍😁
Patenting game mechanics has always seemed insane, Imagine if Hitchcock had patented the dolly zoom, or the dutch angle was patented
This is really just a microcosm of modern investing practices. Investing in IP is big right now and it's why you're seeing Japanese companies make more gameplay patents even when most don't plan on enforcing them or outright know they're not truly enforceable just because they can tell investors that they're holding a bunch of IP and potentially secure more funding.
Look up "crazy taxi patent lawsuit" it's literally why minimaps became used instead of arrows.
We could go even further, imagine if stuff like Menus and directional movement were patented, boom, literally 99% of the industry is gone.
Peggle is patented until 2028
It seems so dumb that they filed the patent 30 years after the invention. Pokemon blue and red came out in 1996.
i have a feeling palworld is not revealing everything, they are trying to rile up the public with partial truth.
They didn't patent monster catching mechanics, they patented monster catching in 3D space with balls that trigger capture and battles in that space. The appropriate frame of reference would be something like fan Pokemon mods for Minecraft.
@@SuperSmashDolls So they patented something that existed in other video games in 2012 and existed in a PocketPair title in 2020. Sounds like a bad decision to me.
Not sure if Japan has any sort of "friend of the court" briefings, but it would be nice if Microsoft's Japanese branch could file one in support of Pocket Pair considering World of Warcraft also runs afoul of these in various ways.
Why would microsoft aid a competitor? Patents take YEARS to litigate, Nintendo is only doing this as an emergency button after Sony partnered with Palworld.
@@techpriest4347 Microsoft would be aiding a small fish 3rd party developer that can release on their systems while hurting a big fish rival that won't release their games on X-box.
@@techpriest4347 because it is in EVERYONES best interest that Nintendo doesn't get a monopoly on the monster Catcher genre. Every big publisher has skin in this fight.
@@sanatana1 you do realize that there are millions of monster catcher game released every year, and they are all fine. if you are only about supporting sony, then you are also the same as those supporting nintendo lol
@@pencilcheck Do you listen at all? Pocketpair is NOT owned by Sony. They are PARTNERS with Sony and only after having already solo developed Palworld.
Japanese Lawyers and Nintendo: We never have never lost a case. We are 100% win rate!
Palworld: Care to start you 100% losing streak from here on out?
Nintendo's 1 billion dollar lawyer, "we can buy a win, can you?"
8:30 I don't know about it being a bad decision, the money is one thing but Nintendo is seeking an injunction against Palworld as well as the money and given they just signed a deal with Sony to make Palworld into it's own whole franchise complete with an anime, merch, and probably more games no longer being able to sell Palworld in its current state would probably hurt that.
There's a non-zero chance that this sets a precedent. But it's actually possible that at some point in the future wizards of the Coast the owners of dungeons & dragons will technically be able to sue people for using the concept of hit points in their game.
This is truly heinous and quite frankly I hope the legal system deals with this properly otherwise the entire industry might collapse
Palworld Lawsuit - 2 Electric pikachu
If they win this, i hope they put a npc into make that looks similar to mario, so we can murder him in game.
Japanese patents system is first to file, not first to release. You can overturn patents due to prior art in Japan, but it’s massively expensive and extremely rare. The only way to legally fight via prior art per rule 29 is that the new product must be identical or virtually indistinguishable from another product. Article 39 favors that the first person to file a patent doesn’t have the burden of proving a patent is valid and original after the patent is granted.
Nintendo is betting on the rule “I’m big, you’re small, I will win even if I loose, because no matter which way you choose if I don’t win at first will make you pay, and win that way.
the fact that the patents were filed after the game came out should honestly get the lawsuit thrown out instantly.
It should. Even with the scummy move they pulled filing them as continuations of a patent from 2021, Nintendo should kick rocks because of Craftopia coming out before that patent did.
That actually breaks US patent law, but Nintendo doesn't care
Absolute pinnacle of scumbaggery that they can file the patents AFTER Palworld is released then sue them after the fact. I seriously hope that the japanese courts understand how bad a precedent it would set to allow a company to retroactively sue for patent infringement.
The patent was filed 3 years BEFORE Palworld was released
To add to that, a child patent was created after Palworld was released.
Technically speaking, the patent was filed with for Legends: Arceus, 2 (3 if you count filing date) years before Palworld's release. The 2024 patent is a child patent that covers a specific chunk of the parent patent for Arceus, so they can prosecute for violating that specific part. However, Pocket Pair had a version of the same mechanic in their game Craftopia- which came out in 2020, well before the patents for Arceus were filed.
@@tygerion4404 But it's also a mechanic that was used in ARK Survival Evolved in 2017, which is ever so slightly before 2020. Pixelmon mod for minecraft did it well before 2020 as well. Nintendo has less than a leg to stand on with this patent.
at least in europe it wouldn’t be possible to patent something that is used by somebody else, but I don‘t know about japanese copyright law
Moon channel, a lawyer TH-camr did a video about this, his explanation being that this was a preemptive attack against Sony for entering into the sort of Pokemon market.
could be seen as trying to maintain a sort of monopoly which it shouldnt have any power to do.
one of the best yt channels of 2024
Moonie did a great video on this
Absolutely, Had no idea Sony was as involved as it is.
Imo , Moon have not so great take on the matter , one it was Nintendo who switched the deal to Philip to make their own disk and two , he feel Palworld can cause brand confusion which is bogus cus Pokemon have decades of advertising theirs franchises which is now one of the largest on Earth , anyone with access to media can easily recognize Pokemon , in court of law there is no place for " feeling " . Though he still right about one thing , that Sony rattle Nintendo which prompt Nintendo to nib the bub fast .
Hopefully, big Daddy Sony can get involved and open the war chest, and we get a true battle of the Kaijus.
Sony partnering with Palworld was the first shot in this battle. Also Sony Games is doing this to weaken Nintendo's flagship ip because their own company isn't doing well.
@@techpriest4347 Well when you fund a game like concord it does hurt your reputation, so it's not surprising. (Not to mention the ps5 pro shenanigans.)
I wonder that if Nintendo looses, patent hungry companies (like Nintendo) could try to make essentially tech demo sized games first to patent things, and then use those patents in their games, rather than waiting until the game is released to have ground for patenting it. As the former would lead to them possibly being able to quickly patent things before others can do it, avoiding the Craftopia and Arceus thing, as I assume they both were being worked on for a while.
Maybe this would also lead to them quickly patenting things they hear other people are working on, if they are also working on something similar.
nintendo only do this for sony, don't think they care about other companies btw
@@pencilcheck Don't b surprised in a future. The comment above is really reasonable
They could patent mechanics only if they can prove they are the first to design it. The legal mess surrounding this case is that it allegedly tries to do something retroactively. Patents obtained through tech-demos would only be doing it for the sake of getting the patent, not trying to take possession of mechanics that you believe the competitors are already working on. Patents surrounding vague mechanics in technology is, while scummy, still legal if you don't have someone with prior existing cases of that patented technology.
@@Armament0fJustice i want to see nintendo's side or see a third party revealing the case details because this is palworld's lawyer manipulation as they might not reveal everything about the case for their benefit.
@@Armament0fJustice I also share the similar sentiment that it makes no sense to patent mechanics of a game, unfortunately, there are so many game mechanics patent out there though, and some also does it retroactively. I do wonder if there are other sides of the lawsuits that palworld didn't reveal?
Even the Pokémon Minecraft mod Pixelmon had the catch mechanic for years now. Owning a concept is so crazy to me
Patenting game mechanics is like patenting police chases in movies. "You can't have a chase between the protagonist and law enforcement, we own the patent for that, give us money!"
4:00 so would this mean the lawsuit would be retro active meaning they can go after anyone who has ever made this mechanic in any game ever past or future? if so this will destroy gaming advancement forever
Insane precedent
The "Hello there" was spot on!
The thing about "filing the patent later" is actually incorrect. The patent they point to as-is has been in existence since after Palworld came out, correct, but the contents of the patent are not new. The patent they reference is a consolidation patent which incorporated several pre-existing patents (which existed since the 90s). That is a process that is allowed by the patent office and the reason you would want to consolidate these patents into a single one is that, if you can show that someone went against a PART of the patent, he disregarded the WHOLE of the patent. So they put many of their gameplay patents into one to be able to say that all these mechanics are protected, even if a court only agreed that a part of them are so far.
Under USA Patent Law. Timing is everything so making/filing a Patent too late can throw the Patent out.
Patents are never retroactive in America.
@@absolstoryoffiction6615 They are when they exclusively unify pre-existing patents, genius. And not that it matters because patent law is very internationalised, but this is a Japanese case brought in Japan. Doesn't look like you have any idea what you're talking about. Wanna hear about this at length, several lawyers in the field have already made lengthy videos on the topic on TH-cam, and I'm not wasting my time typing out a two-page response just for you to go "NUH-UH!". Watch legal Mindset or whoever. There's more than enough material to inform yourself on, since you clearly didn't beforehand.
@DeReAntiqua
Um, actually, in regard to USA Patent Law. That's not a thing USA does. We don't uphold Parent Patents. Why do you think we gave WB about 20 years since all USA Patents have 25 years max.
That's more of a Japanese Patent Law regulation. USA doesn't have a forever continuous Patent as a regulation.
Again, USA Patents are not retroactive. And there is no such thing as an International Patent. It's all jurisdiction by jurisdiction.
State by State for Patents exclusive to America.
@@absolstoryoffiction6615 Uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuh... yes. It is EXPLICITLY a thing. And yes, I'm turning off reply notifications for this thread after this and outright muting you two mouthbreathers because I'm not wasting my time endlessly responding to half-witted wanna-be lawyers whose whole argument is "NUH-UH! THE LAW WORKS LIKE _I AND I ALONE_ DECIDE!".
35 U.S.C. §121, for instance, states:
If two or more independent and distinct inventions are claimed in one application, the Director may require the application to be restricted to one of the inventions. _If the other invention is made the subject of a divisional application, which complies with the requirements of section 120, it shall be entitled to the benefit of the filing date of the original application._ A patent issuing on an application with respect to which a requirement for restriction under this section has been made, or on an application filed as a result of such a requirement, shall not be used as a reference either in the Patent and Trademark Office or in the courts against a divisional application or against the original application or any patent issued on either of them, if the divisional application is filed before the issuance of the patent on the other application. The validity of a patent shall not be questioned for failure of the Director to require the application to be restricted to one invention.
@DeReAntiqua
Under the Original Patent by the original duration, yes, if given the max duration of 25 years or less. One can merge their future Patents with the older Patent if it is derived from the original.
However, by no means, it does not extend the duration nor renew it entirely.
That is USA Patent Law. Which is why WB was given 20 years and not a perpetual exclusive ownership of the Patent. USA Patents can not even be renewed as well.
You've stated nothing new to me. Oh, and Time isn't the only factor which can null & void a Patent in America.
having played pal world and being a huge Pokémon fan since the 90's. it plays more like Rune factory or harvest moon or even Jade cocoon. but it's funny the length these people go to assert their dominance.
It's Palworld being in the monster genre first hand. People might argue if it is similar to Pokemon or not, but people think of Pokemon every time there's another game in the genre. With Palworld being the 2nd largest IP in said genre (by a long shot even the third and rest of monster games combined), TPC has to make a move whether Pocketpair partnered with Sony/Aniplex or another. When Palworld gets it's own anime and TCG/merch, the comparison people do will become paramount as this is not exclusive to games now.
I saw this comparison on another video discussing the lawsuit update and it's a more accurate comparison.
Palworld isn't "Pokemon with guns", it's Ark Survival with cute pokemon-like creatures. It plays absolutely nothing like Pokemon at all. The core of its gameplay is a survival crafting exploration game that is supported by a monster collecting and battling mechanic.
I really hope Thor checks out Moonchannel's video, because he covers a lot of the background corporate ownership details that are likely the real reasons this lawsuit is happening. Short version: this is a defensive lawsuit by Nintendo indirectly targeted at Sony
yet, it shouldn't stand. murder isnt smiled upon just because someone pushed you on the ground once.
Regarding the lawsuit, it’s less about Paleworld and PP, and more about Nintendo vs Sony. PP just became the battleground in this bigger rivalry. It's really a case of two major companies clashing, not a big corporation vs an indie dev.
Moon Channel did an excellent video explaining why Nintendo likely wouldn't have sued PP without Sony being involved. Definitely a good Video to check out before making loud claims that Nintendo is the devil.
The worst result of this if it gets through is the possible defensive fallout that could damage the game industry. If competitors can file patents after you release a game and then sue you for using a mechanic before they filed the patent you create an environment where you are now forcing developers to defensively file patents on their mechanics. If everyone starts patenting mechanics then the environment of games will get very narrow very fast.
the patent space is just like the nuke space ... we all enjoy peace on the pretense that everyone wont press their special red button ... but when someone does that flimsy reality just falls apart
The patent was filed 3 years before the release of Palworld
@@DarthAnimal Two years. They're suing under the _Japanese_ patent, _NOT_ the US patent.
Notably, the Japanese patent was filed two years after Pocket Pair released Craftopia- which has the same concept.
Pocket Pair had already created the function Nintendo patented years before Nintendo patented it. Even if we go by the US patent date, Craftopia still means that Pocket Pair had created the function a year before Nintendo patented it.
@@tygerion4404 And ARK Survival Evolved did it 3 years before then.
Pretty sure they already have case law in Japan over game mechanics. I remember some of the big guys going against each other, every company in Japan has been burned by patent trolls and hence a patent arms race between everyone and the Japanese Patent office is overwhelmed.
Nintendo would've likely had my support if they went for Copyright Infringement. That, to me as a layman, seems like they have a fairly strong leg to stand on.
This patent lawsuit seems like we collectively entered a portal to loopy-land.
Tbh the fact its Nintendo might actually be a they want to lose or they want the press. Nintendo has an absolute ton of patent lawsuits if they win, they may actually hope to lose
If Nintendo's lawyers believed they had a valid copyright claim, Palworld would have never been released. They'd have been sued into the ground after the first announcement.
@@BFedie518 yes, I did also watch him say that, but without further elaboration it's hard for a casual layman to understand why exactly.
@@BlazeLycan Tbh I wrote my comment before I got to that part of the video. I wouldn't have bothered repeating it otherwise.
This is pretty much how I feel. I haven't played it, but it seems like palword is a very original and interesting game. I think it's a bad move not to commit to an original art style because they're always gonna look like off-brand pokemon at this rate. I don't love the pokemon style, but the palworld critter design looks even worse to me. Maybe this is unrealistic, but I think getting sued for copyright might even forcibly help them stand out in the long term
I hope Palworld sees this SPECIALLY the part at 16:42 and it helps them take these dishonorable people down. Not really losing anything myself Nintendo wise, I stopped supporting them years ago!
Planting game mechanics is like an artist sitting there in panting oil painting.
Straight up as a one-for-one comparison
There is no argument for not pirating nintendos games at this point
well, you have someone who will get more lawsuits from nintendo for streaming all pirated games early, why not you join them? see how it feels like to get sued by nintendo.
If buying isnt owning, pirating isnt stealing
I still buy most of my games tho and only pirate old stuff that you cant buy even if you wanted to
@@richardtickler8555 pirating is never about stealing but loss of revenue since software can be duplicated with no big cost, you can't steal something that can be duplicated anywhere. pirating = less future sales in their argument. making sales is all company care about by the end of the day, your argument wouldn't fly to those companies. you have to say that you buy everything, and you never pirate, as all of your entertainment is part of your purchases anyway. as any of your actions doesn't take away future sales.
I wouldn't be surprised if after Nintendo wins this lawsuit (and if they win) that they would go around and start sue-ing tons and tons of other companies too.
Maybe their next target is Temtem.
Well, Pocketpair now have ****you money thanks to their unprecedented success, so with the backing of Sony they might decide to challenge this extremely flimsy case even though it'll cost more in legal fees than it would to simply settle.
From Sony's perspective it might be worth footing the bill to achieve dominance over Nintendo on this one as it opens up huge challenge potential to Pokemon in a broad range of formats. This is now about so much more than just Palworld the game.
Temtem would be safe as that IP never expanded to the scale of The Pokemon Company. Palworld has way more potential even compared to IPs such as Yokai watch.
@@Super_Tristan1005their patent isn’t even valid in the US yet, and likely won’t be accepted in the US. Japan doesn’t seem to have the same rules for defending patents based on previous patent suits in Japan over game mechanics.
TemTem has been out for 4 years, quit fear mongering
@@DarthAnimal Ahh so it's fear mongering when someone brings up another comparable example to Palworld that wasn't attacked by Nintendo purely because TemTem didn't make even a fraction of what Palworld did. Stop deep throating Nintendos cock in replies to every comment please.
This just feels like a dirty move that sets a possible precedent for other companies to just go and patent any mechanic possible just to not get sued. Or Sue those who have a marginal success to get a cut of the pie.
But what I am wondering. Because this is a lawsuit in Japan, aimed at a Japanese Patent. Would someone who has a game with similar mechanics (E.g. Ark Survival Evolved) be at risk of any lawsuit if they choose not to release their game in Japan.
I read some when I saw Sega suing some mobile game company right after nintendo also sue palword.
Some people said there is a patent for features like "leveling multiple skills at once" and "some form item synthesis".
There's one I read that it's almost a quest/task reward with notification of completion.
patent code JP5806789B1
One of sega patent JP5930111B2 ,
I used the google patent to read them.
The precedent has been set years ago, this isn't a new thing
The precedent Nintendo is trying to set is the ability to file the patents AFTER someone else starts using the mechanic and still have them hold up.
@nobodyimportant2470 If that was the case they already did that, but that's not what's happening
If this somehow goes through, someone should patent "moving left in a 2D space" and sue Nintendo
Another video I watched on the subject had posited this case isn't "Nintendo v. Palworld" nor "Nintendo v. PocketPair", but is instead "Nintendo v. Sony" by proxy and the motive dates back to the Nintendo-Sony fallling out in the early '90s. The two had once partnered to make a console with a CD reader, but Nintendo backed out after realizing Sony was using the partnership to get Nintendo under their thumb-an unfortunately common method of unofficial acquisitions in Japan.
I'm surprised Nintendo's patent doesn't just read "video games".
Me and the boys getting ready to start making Motion Picture Passtimes:
@@MeloniestNeonPatent CGI 😂
this whole palworld lawsuit is where i draw the line at supporting nintendo in any way shape or form. legally they can protect their ip but this is just beyond scummy. all they care about is money and it shows. otherwise they wouldnt be going after fan games and fan projects. yes pal world isnt a fangame but the fact is that nintendo is beyond anti-consumer to where they make companies like gamestop look like saints in comparison. they probably dont even care how they look to their fans anymore otherwise they wouldnt be doing this scummy behavior.
"all they care about is money"
"asks for 65 thousand dollars"
Yeah okay bud
@@DarthAnimal They ask for that little amount so that PocketPair will be more likely to settle and set the precedent that Nintendo can do this. Then Nintendo would be able to do this with more competitors.
@kinshorin it's patent law lol there's already precedent
@@DarthAnimal nintentard spotted go back to ur cave daddy nintendo doesn't care about u
Pocket pair MUST fight this case.
Depending on the court of law, aka the country the case is being brought in front of, PP would be required to face lawsuits in every country where Palworld was distributed.
That $33K U.S. for this singular case turns into an exponential amount based on the ruling of the judge.
If PP does not fight this lawsuit:
They will be opening up civil lawsuits in the future for not only themselves, but it would open up the financial incentives for civil lawsuits against ALL FUTURE game devs who personally distribute a game that even ‘slightly’ resembles an existing game.
STAND YOUR GROUND POCKET PAIR!!!
2:47 to be clear, the parents are older than Palworld. The date that was cited early was just the last update.
10:29 Patents should be readily available blueprints for ALL to use for FREE, to advance technology. Not some hack way to make some extra money. A patent is supposed to be an BADGE OF HONOR for a creator, inventor, researcher, etc.
Patents exist to protect inventors and their investments from other huge players in the field who would would steal their work.
If you let everyone use patents freely, you are basically stealing all the R&D someone else did. It would kill innovation.
If Palworld wants to play Nintnedo's game
they could patent the function to have a party of characters in the user's possession, files it, and sue Nintendo for infringement
(unless a patent for that already exists)
Given Nintendo own 8000 patents ( could be wrong though ) , i think they just have one of those ....
I don't know what is going to happen but interesting that palworld revealed it, and I wonder what is on the nintendo side, and if they are in a court, wonder if they will show the court proceeding
That's not how the law works in Japan if there isn't already a patent for it you can't file a patent after it's public knowledge.
@@teamofone1219 So simply release your mechanic idea into the public and nintendo can't file a patent?
@@alan62036 The thing with Nintendo is they give the best BJs around to get their way no one can out BJ them.
11:10 I remember on the Amiga there was the games Skidmarks (1993) and Super Skidmarks (1995) that had a Pong game you could play during the loading sections.