Nintendo and The Pokémon Company suing Pocket Pair (Palworld developers) for patent infringement

[Julius]

So, this is huge.

Quote

Filing of Patent Infringement Lawsuit Against Pocket Pair Inc.

Nintendo Co., Ltd. (Headquarters: Minami-ku, Kyoto, President & CEO: Shuntaro Furukawa, hereinafter referred to as "the Company"), in collaboration with The Pokémon Company, filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Pocket Pair Co., Ltd. (Headquarters: 2-10-2 Higashi-Gotanda, Shinagawa-ku, Tokyo, hereinafter referred to as the "Defendant") in the Tokyo District Court on September 18, 2024.

This lawsuit seeks an injunction against infringement and damages for allegedly infringing multiple patents by the game "Palworld" developed and distributed by the defendant.

In order to protect our important intellectual property, which we have built up through many years of efforts, we will continue to take necessary measures against infringement of intellectual property, including our brand.

For some examples of why this action is being taken:

There was also a lot of discussion around the animations and designs in the game's own thread which might help anyone who has missed all of this news get caught up. 

News came out just last week that the game was expected to feature at next week's Tokyo Game Show ahead of a potential announcement of a PS5 version of the game, the existence of which had seemingly leaked. Curious to see if any of those plans change. 

Edited September 19, 2024 by Julius

[Hero-of-Time]

Good for them. It's rip off designs are pretty blatant. Nintendo must have just been making sure everything was in order before going after them.

[Dcubed]

Shocking that it took them this long.  The asset theft is so blatant that it may as well have been an Ace Attorney case.

Can't help but feel that the damage has already been done.  Pocket Pal have already made out like bandits, and the courts may not side with Nintendo for having taken too long to bring the matter to them I fear...

Still, it's interesting that they're approaching this from a patent infringement perspective, rather than a copyright infringement perspective... Sounds like they have an interesting battle plan here, perhaps with the goal of opening up Pocket Pal to Discovery; where they will inevitably find more incriminating evidence of their asset theft…

Edited September 19, 2024 by Dcubed

[Glen-i]

OK, first of all...

Cheered me right up this morning. Thinking about the blatant artistic theft here still makes me feel sick.

Although, I have been sick recently, so that probably isn't helping.

Secondly...

5 hours ago, Dcubed said:

Still, it's interesting that they're approaching this from a patent infringement perspective, rather than a copyright infringement perspective...

It might be both, for how vague it is. Here's an excellent post detailing some facts about it.

Nintendo deffo think they have a case here. Will be interesting to see what the play is.

[Julius]

15 minutes ago, Glen-i said:

Will be interesting to see what the play is.

I thought it was clear what the play is?

This all sounds like lawyer speak for

Edited September 19, 2024 by Julius

[EEVILMURRAY]

Quite some interesting clones there. A few I think may have been reaching a bit, and others I see other Pokémon instead of the ones that video showed, there were two I would've said we more Lilligant than the ones they shown.

[Hero-of-Time]

It seems that the TGS listing for the PS5 version is no longer being advertised. I wonder if Sony no longer wants it on the platform due to the lawsuit?

[Glen-i]

24 minutes ago, Hero-of-Time said:

It seems that the TGS listing for the PS5 version is no longer being advertised. I wonder if Sony no longer wants it on the platform due to the lawsuit?

Probably, and it would be the smart move. This lawsuit hasn't just materialised on a whim. There's a very good chance Nintendo have a leg to stand on.

It's amusing, people on Era were speculating that Sony might step in to back up Pocket Pair. Mate, if anything I was certain they'd wanna distance themselves ASAP.

[Ike]

I think it's funny they got their dad to go beat them up.

[Julius]

Don't know how I missed this but I did 

Seems very appropriate that it's been recommended to me now in light of the lawsuit 

Edited September 27, 2024 by Julius

[drahkon]

Looks like Nintendo sued them over gameplay mechanics that they (and/or GameFreak, TPC? whoever) patented.

Say what you want about Palworld but patenting gameplay mechanics is a ridiculously shitty thing to do. Case in point: Warner Bros. patenting the Nemesis system back in the day...it was an awesome idea and if other devs were allowed to improve on that we would've some really cool games now with that system. But noooooooo, Monolith Productions is gone and thanks to that patent we'll never see anything like the Nemesis system ever again (or until the patent runs out? I don't know how that shit works ).

Nintendo can fuck right off.

Edited May 8 by drahkon

[Glen-i]

5 hours ago, drahkon said:

Say what you want about Palworld but patenting gameplay mechanics is a ridiculously shitty thing to do.

Yes. But I doubt they'll (Nintendo) do anything with it to the majority of Pokémon-likes out there. It was likely determined that going after gameplay mechanics was more of a winnable case then the much more difficult one of proving their designs were nicked. Because unfortunately, no matter how blatant it is, you can't just say "Look at them, for Christ's sake!" and expect that to hold up by itself.

My guess is that they went this route because they wanted to hit Pocket Pair without the risk of losing a copyright infringement case, and opening the floodgates for everyone creating games with their own "Totally-not-Lucario, wink".
I wish they were more brave about it, instead of going this crummy roundabout way, but eh, it's Pocket Pair, don't feel any sympathy for them.

Anyway, like I said, won't matter to all the actual effort-laden Poké-clones out there. I doubt Nintendo would've put Cassette Beasts on that NSO free trial thingie at around the same time as this lawsuit if they were that concerned over mechanics.

Edited May 8 by Glen-i

[Jonnas]

On 5/8/2025 at 1:49 PM, drahkon said:

Looks like Nintendo sued them over gameplay mechanics that they (and/or GameFreak, TPC? whoever) patented.

Say what you want about Palworld but patenting gameplay mechanics is a ridiculously shitty thing to do. Case in point: Warner Bros. patenting the Nemesis system back in the day...it was an awesome idea and if other devs were allowed to improve on that we would've some really cool games now with that system. But noooooooo, Monolith Productions is gone and thanks to that patent we'll never see anything like the Nemesis system ever again (or until the patent runs out? I don't know how that shit works ).

Nintendo can fuck right off.

I hear that patenting mechanics is a common thing. Character silhouettes behind objects? Nintendo has a patent on that. Minigames on loading screens? Namco has a patent on that. The concept of Title Screens? It was either Capcom, SNK, or Namco, I forget. Standard practise in any technology-based company, basic protection.

It's just that it's generally agreed that nobody's suing anyone over that. Either out of Gentleman's agreement, or because companies don't want to put their patents on the line, what matters is that nobody's getting pissy over just that. It's part of the reason as to why this lawsuit is so fascinating, Videogame companies rarely bother to fight over patents (and as per Glen-i's post, the actual intent is likely about something else).

As for Warner Bros... did they ever actually try to prevent another developer from using a Nemesis-like system? Have they ever publicly bothered to enforce that thing that the internet keeps accusing them of enforcing? Is there a small developer that got a C&D letter from them or something? Legitimate questions, because I never heard of any.

[Cube]

4 hours ago, Jonnas said:

 

As for Warner Bros... did they ever actually try to prevent another developer from using a Nemesis-like system? Have they ever publicly bothered to enforce that thing that the internet keeps accusing them of enforcing? Is there a small developer that got a C&D letter from them or something? Legitimate questions, because I never heard of any.

Nobody has really tried. There was an indie game that was working in a nemesis like system (before the parent), but couldn't get it to work. Not even Monolith could get it to work in another game - the concept is kind of dependant on both the player character and enemies respawning in-universe. 

Many parents are very specific implementations. Like Nintendo's sanity effect patent, it requires a visible bar that increases them as it depletes.  

[Dcubed]

Guilt by admission here.

Nintendo will probably argue it in court even.  Making this change after the legal action was announced proves that they knowingly infringed on their patent.

Edited Tuesday at 04:23 PM by Dcubed

[Will]

On 5/8/2025 at 1:49 PM, drahkon said:

Looks like Nintendo sued them over gameplay mechanics that they (and/or GameFreak, TPC? whoever) patented.

Say what you want about Palworld but patenting gameplay mechanics is a ridiculously shitty thing to do.

It's not the mechanics, it's the expression of them.

On 5/8/2025 at 3:15 PM, Glen-i said:

Yes. But I doubt they'll (Nintendo) do anything with it to the majority of Pokémon-likes out there. It was likely determined that going after gameplay mechanics was more of a winnable case then the much more difficult one of proving their designs were nicked. Because unfortunately, no matter how blatant it is, you can't just say "Look at them, for Christ's sake!" and expect that to hold up by itself.

My guess is that they went this route because they wanted to hit Pocket Pair without the risk of losing a copyright infringement case, and opening the floodgates for everyone creating games with their own "Totally-not-Lucario, wink".

Yeah it's exactly this as it makes it so blatantly obvious where the rip off is taking place. I've only looked at one source as this hasn't really interested me but it's immediately obvious that Nintendo will have something to the effect of "Gliding using an in-game pet as the gliding mechanism" protected and Palworld have... made a system where you glide using an in-game pet as the mechanism - it's as much of a clear cut case as you can get.

10 hours ago, Cube said:

Many parents are very specific implementations. Like Nintendo's sanity effect patent, it requires a visible bar that increases them as it depletes.

Yeah they have to be specific, the Tetris case is an interesting one to read up on how it all works.