• darthelmet@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    91
    ·
    1 month ago

    Game mechanic patents are such an unbelievable joke it’s hard to understand how any court could take them seriously. “Yes your honor. As you can see, we own the exclusive rights to the idea of throwing a ball at a creature in a video game.”

    • Glitterbomb@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 month ago

      I’m always happy to remind everyone that your childhood didn’t have minigames during loading screens because it was a patented game mechanic!

      • overload@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 month ago

        That one really pisses me off. It’s such a good idea and would have been applicable to almost every game.

  • stickmanmeyhem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    67
    ·
    1 month ago

    Wait, so the patents Nintendo is suing them for breaching were only filed… months after Palworld was already wildly successful?

    • Kelly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Admittedly my understanding of patents is pretty rudimentary but I thought you had to apply before releasing the idea into the world.

      If that was right the general concept of a container that you throw at a creature to capture it would be considered unpatentable after Pocket Monsters Red and Green released in February 1997. Of course they could trademark the specific markings of the pokeball but the general mechanic would be fair game.

      • Takumidesh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 month ago

        There is a concept called prior art in patent law. Prior art is information about the invention that exists before filing, it can both help secure a patent as well as prevent someone filing a patent for someone else’s existing invention.

        • Kelly@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 month ago

          I’m not sure “in a 3D space” qualifies as an “inventive step” these days.

          It definitely feels like something a person with ordinary skill in the art to which the invention pertains could easily have made on the basis of an invention or inventions that are already known.

      • ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Palworld had trailers featuring gameplay in 2021. Besides that, there are lots of games where you throw an object to add a character to your party. Including another earlier game by PocketPair called Craftopia. World of Warcraft added “battle pets” where you can throw a cage to catch animals and add them to your battle pets roster to fight against other trainers in 2012.

        • Pika@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          to add on to this, the video is dated in june 2021, and the patent show in japan wasnt registered until december 2021, which means palworld was already well on the way prior to them actually submitting these patents.

          all three of the patents listed in the article have a japanese patent registered on 12/22/21. Palworld appears to have working gameplay mechanics by june of 2021 as shown by their announcement trailer.

      • Ascyron
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        1 month ago

        That’s not what this article says. Earliest application was March 5, 2024.

        Palworld was released on Jan 18th, 2024, a month and a half beforehand.

          • homicidalrobot@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 month ago

            The patents being referred to by the article are not Japanese patents. Did you know Japan has its own court system?

            • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              Why are you lying? The article links to a google patents page, under the Japanese patents. There are US versions of these patents available to view, which the article didn’t link to.

              JP7545191 is a japanese patent. You can click one of the little blue US buttons to see the American equivalent. The same is true of the other two patents in question

  • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    1 month ago

    That “Palworld vs Pokemon comparison” thing has to be a joke, right? “These two creatures look similar, so obviously one of them is a blatant ripoff” and “these two creatures don’t look similar, but obviously one of them is a blatant ripoff” lmao

    Gonna buy another copy of Palworld just to spite Wesley Yin-Poole and Nintendo