Their list of patents is enormous. They could throw darts drunk and in the dark, miss the board completely, and still likely land on something they could claim.
This is a weird patent; it seems to be describing something more akin to Pokemon Home than an actual in-game mechanic, but then the references talk about the pokemon storage system, so who knows?
That’s irrelevant. You can’t patent fantasy creatures. That’s a copyright issue. If they were suing for copyright infringement I might think they had a point, but they’re not.
I think the fact they’re going for a patent suit says they probably think they don’t have enough of an argument for a copyright suit which kind of makes sense. Just because the designs are similar doesn’t mean it’s copyright infringement.
Oh no, both the wolves look like wolves. Never mind they have different color schemes and geometry; look, they’re both wolves!
I approached the claims with an open mind, but when I read that the worst offender was the wolf I realized that none of the claims could possibly hold water.
Patent infringement? Did they patent “beat up thing, throw ball at thing, capture thing?”
They seem to have a patent for “Pokemon Box Storage” and palworld also has a “Palbox” so maybe that?
So putting shit in a box is apparently Nintendos invention!
Do they get royaltys for shipping goods?
Their list of patents is enormous. They could throw darts drunk and in the dark, miss the board completely, and still likely land on something they could claim.
This is a weird patent; it seems to be describing something more akin to Pokemon Home than an actual in-game mechanic, but then the references talk about the pokemon storage system, so who knows?
Maybe not on that, but the creatures in Palworld are sometimes a direct ripoff of Pokémon. I’m with Nintendo on this one.
That’s irrelevant. You can’t patent fantasy creatures. That’s a copyright issue. If they were suing for copyright infringement I might think they had a point, but they’re not.
I think the fact they’re going for a patent suit says they probably think they don’t have enough of an argument for a copyright suit which kind of makes sense. Just because the designs are similar doesn’t mean it’s copyright infringement.
Oh no, both the wolves look like wolves. Never mind they have different color schemes and geometry; look, they’re both wolves!
I approached the claims with an open mind, but when I read that the worst offender was the wolf I realized that none of the claims could possibly hold water.