+- Tendo City (https://www.tendocity.net)
+-- Forum: Tendo City: Metropolitan District (https://www.tendocity.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Tendo City (https://www.tendocity.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=42)
+--- Thread: Nintendo are now Patent Trolls (/showthread.php?tid=7573)
Nintendo are now Patent Trolls - Dark Jaguar - 21st September 2024
You may have heard the whole Palworld scandal already, getting misreported with articles going on about the similarity of various designs to certain Pokemon. I want to clarify something here. Nintendo is not suing about copyright, so whatever you feel about how close the art design is, it's not relevant to the case.
It's a patent suit. They are suing over the concept of using small items to catch large monsters. This is on the heels of another recent suit where Nintendo sued another company for using their patented concept of using a touch screen to emulate an analog stick, from Super Mario 64 DS specifically. These suits are both based in Japan, where their patent office is way too lenient. Such patents would never have been granted in the U.S., and notably, it reminds me of Capcom suing SNK way back in the day over stealing the concept of a "fighting game", and of the lawsuit against Namco for using the concept of a loading screen mini-game.
Back in 2013, a case regarding software patents went to the Supreme court here in the U.S., and it was determined that such patents are invalid as they are too obvious and hinder innovation in the software space... which they did. It didn't help that these software patents were badly defined in the first place. That is, someone just comes up with the idea of "do this, but in software" with no actual implementation developed, no source code or anything, and someone who actually does the work of realizing it then gets sued. It's called a "patent troll", and yes, it's ridiculous.
Nintendo has crossed a horrible threshold, and they've become one of the worst threats in not just the gaming industry but software as a whole. I hope they lose this, and lose BIG, because this is the kind of nonsense that can stifle creativity and cause all kinds of companies to go after each other. Just keep in mind that Nintendo will likely get sued right after this by Atlus, because catching monsters and training them comes from Shin Megami Tensei before Nintendo came up with their "Monsters in my Pocket". However, Japanese law being what it is, Nintendo is likely to win there. Here's hoping the U.S. decision stands as far as such software patents go here, but recently, other software companies have been lobbying congress critters to pass new laws establishing software patents back into reality again, as well as DNA patents.
Let me be very clear on this point. Yes, it's pretty obvious how similar these "pals" are to pokemon, but Nintendo didn't go after them on that, or on copyright. The very fact Nintendo is pursuing this as a patent case is a tacit admission they know they wouldn't win a copyright suit, that the designs and storyline backgrounds are different ENOUGH that they are their own thing, just like Captain Marvel not QUITE being Superman, or... well all of the OTHER cases of comic book characters clearly being "inspired" by existing characters. Heck we've got Namor coming out to retake the throne of Atlantis from that uptstart Aqua Man pretty soon, so that's still a thing.
RE: Nintendo are now Patent Trolls - A Black Falcon - 21st September 2024
Palworld is such an obvious ripoff that I imagine Nintendo has a case. It's not just a similar game, it copies Nintendo stuff exactly...
I don't think it's a general suit about 'catching monsters'. I think that Palworld exactly copied the catching mechanic from Pokemon, something other monster-catching games don't do.
RE: Nintendo are now Patent Trolls - Dark Jaguar - 22nd September 2024
Again, this isn't a copyright suit or you'd have a point, it's a software patent suit, and frankly, no, absolutely not. By that logic, Sonic "exactly copied" busting blocks to get powerups, and Duke Nukem 3D exactly copied collecting health packs to recover health in that particular "Doom clone". Art of Fighting, and literally every other fighting game beyond "Street Fighter II" and anything Capcom made, wouldn't exist. You do NOT want to take Nintendo's side on this ABF. They're wrong, and you know it. Not to mention, though I already have, how this extends far beyond video games. Operating systems themselves, for example, or web browsers, or any web site using a "shopping cart". You should look into why "software patents" as a concept were ruled invalid by the Supreme Court.
You think Palworld's the first game to use a small object to catch a big creature? It wasn't even Pokemon. Artistically it looks pretty close, but that's irrelevant in a patent suit. All that matters is the function, and the function has existed since certain Dungeons and Dragons spells to capture familiars in small jars.
RE: Nintendo are now Patent Trolls - Dark Jaguar - 22nd September 2024
Also, and I just have to add a few things... Nintendo are being complete hypocrites here. Look, Palworld isn't really my cup of tea. I didn't get the game, but I DO know it's very distinctly different from how a typical pokemon game plays. It's a survival-construction game, like your Seven Days to Die or your Mine's Craft, and everything having to do with that. You fight alongside these critters... with guns that are... look the guns are very obviously not going to make gun manufacturers happy with how similar they are but... games have been getting away with ripping off gun designs but just calling them something else for decades now so I doubt that's really going to change. Point is, this is evolving off the ideas of pokemon, not just straight "stealing" the game concept, but more to the point, Nintendo does this ALL the time. Let me list a few direct examples.
Firstly, that first Nintendo patent suit, they sued a company over the concept of using a touch screen as an analog stick. That's purely a software implementation, from the very company that had to settle out of court for using a touch screen as a game control device in the first place.
We can ignore Donkey Kong, because it's resemblance to King Kong is a copyright issue, not a patent issue, and well, Universal lost that copyright lawsuit anyway.
But, Balloon Fight is Joust. It just is. In fact, Balloon Fight has FAR more in common with Joust than Palworld has in common with Pokemon (in terms of game mechanic design).
Hey remember Devil World? That's Pac-Man. That's very clearly Pac-Man. Now with both of these examples, did Nintendo add onto the idea? Sure. Balloon fight added an "adventure mode" that scrolled from right to left in a long level, and Devil World added scrolling around up and down and left and right with a little devil guy in hot pants ordering little imp things to do it. But, clearly Nintendo doesn't think that's a good argument in defense of "stealing" a game design concept.
Donkey Kong? Hey, I CAN mention something here. Space Panic. Donkey Kong is Space Panic, but with a jump button added.
In any case, any argument you make in favor of Nintendo can't bring up the art design. That isn't relevant in a patent case. I won't be bothering to defend the pal's appearance in any case. Just the raw mechanics, and the raw mechanics were already in existence before pokemon.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monster-taming_game
Just take a look at the history. The usage of tiny balls is a matter of art, not mechanic. The taming and catching of monsters is the important thing. But, if that's what matters to you, Enix had already invented that idea in:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robotrek
There you go. Catching monsters in little capsules and sending them out to fight, right there in 1994. Done. Game set match, Nintendo can't claim a patent.
RE: Nintendo are now Patent Trolls - A Black Falcon - 28th September 2024
Why put so much effort into defending a company who release ripoff games with copied characters in them? Seriously, if they're going to so blatantly copy characters, why would it be in any way surprising that they'd copy more than that? I don't think it is at all.
As for Nintendo's early history, technically Pac-Man was inspired by a Sega game called Head-On, which I think is the first game in that specific genre. Head--On and Pac-Man are pretty different, but if you look it up you can see the connection. Devil World is certainly a game in that genre, but the moving screen that you can't control is an interesting gimmick that I don't think anything else did, so it's not just a copy.
And as for Donkey Kong, adding a jump button was one of the most important innovations ever in gaming, probably, so that one really isn't all that close. Space Panic is a DK predecessor but DK evolved things substantially.
Balloon Fight DEFINITELY is Joust, though. I'd think that Midway would have had a good case had they sued Nintendo over that one. Some games in the early years of gaming were 'it's like this popular game but a bit different', but with Balloon Fight there's basically nothing different other than Balloon Trip mode, and I don't think that is enough to make it actually a different game.
Anyway, Nintendo usually wins lawsuits. I don't think they would have filed this case if they didn't think they had a very good case.