Topic: Nintendo Lawsuit's by Palworld

Why Nintendo suing pal world like what wrong with the world lately common sense Nintendo cannot sue because Nintendo have Nexmon they not suing them, but in fact I think they have no right's to shut it down palworld just monster not Pokémon copyright like get it together Nintendo if you shut down palworld I will not paying a dime on you isn't that clear I really mean it. But guys I want your opinion if they shut it down I will still buy Nintendo games or no?

@Buginhead55 Nexomon doesn't get sued because they don't infringe on any patents or copyright. The company which made Palworld clearly tried to copy some things directly rather than making their own unique spin on it and Nintendo's lawyers believe some of this violates existing patents. The courts will decide in the end although I suspect Nintendo wouldn't have sued unless they were very confident Palworld was in violation. Fundamentally you're not allowed to steal patented or copyrighted ideas. I personally don't really care what the outcome of the court case is and it won't change my opinion of Nintendo either way — Nintendo has always been quite protective of their own IP but if the law is on their side, it's hard to complain.

It's because Palworld steals mechanics from TPCi's patents. Like specific things that are blatantly copied. This isn't related to the designs, but rather the actual gameplay itself.

Also this is bound to be brought up- but no, Palworld isn't a "unique take" on monster collecting. It's literally just Ark mashed together with Pokemon, both using systems and ideas that are literally taken from both games and mashed together. This is by design. The CEO Of PocketPair is a guy who genuinely believes that innovation holds companies back, and that it's better to make money off of taking two popular properties and combining them together with minimal changes made to the formulas. Pocketpair also abandons early access games frequently to jump ship onto new early access games. Craftopia, their BotW and Minecraft clone was abandoned for Palworld.

I have the hot take that I really don't care if Palworld stole from Pokemon as long as Pokemon is still the dominant game in its genre. If this lawsuit is legally valid (which from what I've read, the timing of the patents make it immediately questionable), I still don't necessarily want this lawsuit to succeed. Especially if it in no way involves the actual designs that are more possibly actually stolen from a reasonable perspective. The Pokemon character designer/s is the only person/people who has a valid case as far as I can tell, and no one like that is directly involved in this lawsuit. (nor is that direction they went)

The only thing that would make me root for Nintendo for this if Palworld was using its own success to try to go after other games like it.

I mean... they've already made another game that looks a lot like Hollow Knight and apparently has mechanics very closely borrowed from another game...but with base-building. And Pockectpair made another company name to publish it under so that it wasn't obviously associated to Pocketpair... Given their mode of operation, it seems likely if the company could 100% get away with copying IP from Pokemon they would also do it from other game companies including indies less able to defend themselves.

I'm not particularly on Nintendo's side, but I do think Pocketpair was consciously trying to walk as close to the line of stealing as they could get away with so I'm not on their side either.

Oh I've seen enough to think this company isn't the best, don't get me wrong here. That doesn't make me want a Nintendo lawsuit, unless an Epic vs. Apple happens and they both somehow partially lose. If what I've seen is true (which is a caveat because I saw it on Twitter on 2024), Nintendo should be slapped down on this for both trying to legally own game mechanics and for using a patent they got AFTER Palworld to do this.

Well by you guys judgment I think they should banned palworld close down after all they did steal them from their Pokémon clone, but Nintendo need lead them money least 2000$ to live not be homeless.

I think we should let Nintendo to choose which is not banned or banned their game.

@kkslider5552000 We don't know what the patents even are yet. Nintendo hasn't released a document out to the public detailing the lawsuit. I'm not really going to buy what's circulating on social media at the current, given that these situations always have people making things up for clout and to push their own narratives.

Leave the arcane nuances of Japanese patent law to seasoned professionals who earn big money learning this stuff? Nonsense. As an American who has worked alongside Phoenix Wright on a number of cases, I proclaim my expertise over all legal matters!

@Buginhead55 I hope they remove that bug from your head soon, my friend.

@RubyCarbuncle I think in the current conversation right here no one is getting particularly upset aside from possibly the person who created the thread given the deleted messages.

I doubt many of us are experts in the vagaries of international copyright and patent law, but I do think hearing different opinions and discussing the 'what rules are healthy or unhealthy for the gaming community as a whole (both players and developers)' is an interesting question.

@RubyCarbuncle Some people on the internet are jerks 😆 We are fortunate on this website to have a lot of people who aren't jerks plus helpful mods, but even here it is impossible to avoid all rudeness unfortunately. I can't imagine how your age plays into this discussion no matter what.

For what it's worth, I was just trying to reformulate my own thoughts:

If you remove people who are just overly attached to Pokemon or Nintendo and the people overly hostile to big companies or intellectual property laws, I feel like there are two main extremes:

• Small indies(plus content creators, etc. ) who don't have the resources to investigate IP subtleties and get hit by an IP technicality which they have zero clue of and no realistic way to protect against. I think this situation bothers a lot of people.
• Companies (including some small indies) who would happily steal, scam/mislead and bend or abuse any rules they can get away with for a quick buck. We certainly see some of this in the Switch eShop and I think most people would be happy if more of this was caught and banned.

Given statements from the Palworld owners, I think it is pretty clear their situation is between these two extremes. They clearly knew they would have potential IP issues and either chose to ignore it or perhaps rolled the die and hoped Nintendo wouldn't bother with them. It's also true that if their game had been less successful Nintendo may not have bothered to follow up (though you never know with Nintendo). So to me it feels like a grey zone in terms of what's good for the gaming community versus not. We don't want to encourage frivolous or unfair lawsuits regarding IP but we also don't want to encourage people who might happily flaunt the rules and could easily have done a smidge more work to avoid some of the issues. It's the main reason I don't really have an opinion on the outcome; too subtle for me. 😆 Well... plus we don't know the details of the lawsuit so the claim of what Palworld did could either be much more extreme or much less extreme than what people are imagining.

Ah yes, stealing is okay as long as you steal from the big fish. What a logical and ethical legal theory.

@FishyS Is it though? It feels pretty clear that this is closer to wanting to scam, steal, and bend the rules for a quick buck. The CEO doesn't seem to see any ethical issue with copying other games' ideas or using AI, and many of these designs are blatantly similar to existing Pokemon designs. I don't see how you can give Palworld the benefit of the doubt here, there's too much evidence that this was a malicious copying of ideas from Pokemon, and they tried to make it just different enough to slip under the radar.

@Bolt_Strike I agree a lot of the designs are ridiculously close copies of Pokemon designs but it doesn't seem like that is what Nintendo is sueing about (since they are sueing about patents rather than copyright) so I can only assume Palworld doesn't quite cross the legal threshold. I am just guessing here since we only have some of the details so I may be totally wrong. I might have a stronger opinion if I knew the details. And yeah, I agree the CEO sounds a bit questionable — 😆 And there is definitely rule bending at minimum; quite plausibly malicious rule breaking given Nintendo deciding to sue after investigating so long, but we will find out.

@FishyS Yeah I don't get why they're suing over patents rather than copyrights either, the monster designs are what the game seems to be plagiarizing the most.

@PikaPhantom The people who talk about Pokemon going after Dragon Quest amuse me the most since Dragon Quest was taming monsters long before Pokemon existed and Pokemon was the one who heavily cough borrowed a lot of initial design ideas.