• Uninvited Guest@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    12 minutes ago

    How do Japanese patents differ from USA/CAN? My general understanding of patents is that they expire after 20 years - Pokemon is older than that. Do Japanese patents have a longer duration? Did Nintendo patent a game later than the originals?

  • dumbass@leminal.space
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    12 hours ago

    Make it so you launch the ball thing from a sling shot, that’s not throwing the object and it fits the universe

  • adarza@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    80
    ·
    16 hours ago

    These primarily cover throwing an object in a specific direction to either summon a battle character or to capture a creature in the field - mechanics Palworld shared with Pokémon at launch.

    sounds like a mechanic found in a number of video games.

  • iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    13 hours ago

    I am not usually in favour of big companies bullying smaller companies with the law, but it’s pretty egregious how much they were ripping off Pokémon.

    Edited to add, apparently this was a really hot take. I am not saying that the gameplay between the games was similar, but I saw a comparison of several of the designs of the creatures for the first time when this whole kinda started kicking off a bit ago and it was the first time I realized how blatant the designs were lifted right from popular Pokémon. Combined specifically with the pokeball-alikes and like… I don’t know how people can defend it. There’s homage and then there’s IP theft.

    • JackbyDev@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 hours ago

      I’d be more willing to agree if Nintendo was going after them for similar art styles. They went after them for fucking throwing balls of all things. This is going to set a horrible precedent for the game industry.

      So either Nintendo didn’t believe the monster designs were rip offs, or they didn’t feel it was a proper violation because they’ve shown themselves as willing to litigate.

      • iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        9 hours ago

        For one, I didn’t say you could patent an art style. But distinguishable character can be IP. You’re like the fifth person to mention Dragon Quest and I’ve never heard of that comparison before, do you have any examples?

    • hex@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      ·
      15 hours ago

      The game itself isn’t ripping off anything. Pokémon is such a direct “rip off” of digimon, too, then. Except it doesn’t matter, cause that’s what stuff is. Stuff is made up of other stuff and oftentimes there will be similarities!

      • iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        13 hours ago

        I mean, for one I was talking about the designs of the creatures and the specific ball mechanic/theme, but also Pokémon came out before Digimon anyway.

          • iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            9 hours ago

            I don’t mind. It’s no different than Reddit, people see downvotes and just pile on. No room for discussion, no thoughtful discourse, just hive mind.

    • Noxy@yiffit.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      11 hours ago

      I disagree with your premise but even if I agreed that any IP theft has occurred, why do you care? surely you’re aware that nintendo aggressively invests in IP lawyers and lawsuits?

      • iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Well, yes, that’s why the lawsuit was happening. I’m not sure what your point was. I care because I think that IP theft is wrong.