Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Nintendo Obtains New Anti-Palworld Patent and Seeks Even More

gamerant.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 89 posts

Re: Nintendo Obtains New Anti-Palworld Patent and Seeks Even More

#51

Post by portaouflop »

Hamuko wrote: post #49
LordKeren wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, not even close. Nintendo is not a VC funded startup fighting for their survival. The Nintendo switch 2 is right around the corner and looks like it is going to sell extremely well, after the massive success of the switch 1 Patents are not that expensive to file. They are not diverting any meaningful amount of cash flow to this. This is a side activity of a few employees

The success of the Switch 1 might be a reason why the Switch 2 won't be, since game publishers will see that massive Switch 1 install base, still make versions of their games for the Switch 1 if at all feasible and give your average consumer less of a reason to go get one.

You can play switch 1 games on 2 so even if that might happen it won’t impact the success of switch 2

Re: Nintendo Obtains New Anti-Palworld Patent and Seeks Even More

#52

Post by permo-w »

Zren wrote: post #38
MiddleEndian wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Looks like this patent is for capturing a virtual creature with a throwable item. Pokemon came out 29 years ago. Even if you recognize this patent it should be expired rather than slightly tweaked and then extended. Thanks for the reminder to buy Palworld, Nintendo!

The patent mentions the ability to aim the pokeball which wasn't in the first 3 Gameboy games. Does modern Pokémon start battles by throwing a pokeball to release a monster to begin fighting?

>Does modern Pokémon start battles by throwing a pokeball to release a monster to begin fighting?

yes

Re: Nintendo Obtains New Anti-Palworld Patent and Seeks Even More

#53

Post by readyplayernull »

torlok wrote: post #15

Looks like this patent is for capturing a virtual creature with a throwable item. The whole concept is obviously comical, but for additional laughs, this is an opportunity to check out how software patents are written. To quote: > A non-limiting example of a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having stored therein a game program of the present non-limiting example is executed by a computer of an informat…

> a fighting character that fights

THERE! It's only for fighting characters that fight, just make a driving character that drives, or a flying character that flies.

Re: Nintendo Obtains New Anti-Palworld Patent and Seeks Even More

#54

Post by MiddleEndian »

Zren wrote: post #38
MiddleEndian wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Looks like this patent is for capturing a virtual creature with a throwable item. Pokemon came out 29 years ago. Even if you recognize this patent it should be expired rather than slightly tweaked and then extended. Thanks for the reminder to buy Palworld, Nintendo!

The patent mentions the ability to aim the pokeball which wasn't in the first 3 Gameboy games. Does modern Pokémon start battles by throwing a pokeball to release a monster to begin fighting?

>The patent mentions the ability to aim the pokeball which wasn't in the first 3 Gameboy games.

Sure but I'd say aiming is more or less the natural evolution of "$X in 3D instead of 2D." Obviously Nintendo disagrees and perhaps the patent system disagrees (depending on the outcome of whatever court cases happen), but I disagree with them.

Re: Nintendo Obtains New Anti-Palworld Patent and Seeks Even More

#55

Post by portaouflop »

molticrystal wrote: post #30

This reminds me of how Sco [0] started going after everybody as they became less and less relevant eventually leading to their demise. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCO%E2%80%93Linux_disputes?use...

The difference is that Nintendo has been a market leader since the 80s and has been suing for patents and copyright infringement ever since - so their demise is far from guaranteed and they are just as relevant as they were when I was in primary school

Re: Nintendo Obtains New Anti-Palworld Patent and Seeks Even More

#56

Post by permo-w »

portaouflop wrote: post #48
runevault wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I missed that one. For me it is the Nemesis System from Shadow of Mordor/War. They made 2 games and haven't done anything with it since but they still patented it.

They patent that stuff not because they want to use it but because they want to block and stifle the competition — it’s truly despicable if you ask me

I'd suggest "tax" is probably more accurate than "block" or "stifle", especially if they've not released anything since

Re: Nintendo Obtains New Anti-Palworld Patent and Seeks Even More

#57

Post by jillyboel »

MiddleEndian wrote: post #54
Zren wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The patent mentions the ability to aim the pokeball which wasn't in the first 3 Gameboy games. Does modern Pokémon start battles by throwing a pokeball to release a monster to begin fighting?

>The patent mentions the ability to aim the pokeball which wasn't in the first 3 Gameboy games. Sure but I'd say aiming is more or less the natural evolution of "$X in 3D instead of 2D." Obviously Nintendo disagrees and perhaps the patent system disagrees (depending on the outcome of whatever court cases happen), but I disagree with them.

> depending on the outcome of whatever court cases happen

do you not mean the bribery of patent agents?

Re: Nintendo Obtains New Anti-Palworld Patent and Seeks Even More

#58

Post by jillyboel »

markus_zhang wrote: post #35
freedomben wrote: post #14

It seems truly absurd what you can patent nowadays. The system seems utterly broken for its original purpose which was to encourage ingenuity and inventiveness. It now does the exact opposite.

One easy solution is to give such talks in primary/middle schools so children stop buying Nintendo games. Give them all bad publicity. I wouldn't care separating Nintendo lawyers and gamedevs. If the lawyers are shady then the whole thing is shady.

kids really don't care

Re: Nintendo Obtains New Anti-Palworld Patent and Seeks Even More

#59

Post by SLSMan »

agubelu wrote: post #4

So Nintendo is claiming patent infringement for a patent that was registered after Palworld was released? It seems a bit nonsensical, am I understanding it correctly?

(Patent attorney) The patents in question are continuation patents. Essentially, Nintendo filed a patent application before Palworld was released that disclosed the mechanics Nintendo is patenting now. That original application only included claims covering a subset of the mechanics described in the application. They can continue filing additional applications with new claims that cover the mechanics described entirely in the original application and get the benefit of having the priority date of the original application so long as they meet certain requirements about the timing.

Original application: I invented A, B, C, D, E, and F and want A protected; here’s some $. Follow-up application 1: I want invention B protected, here’s some more $. Follow up application 2: I want C protected, here’s some more $.

Part of the idea behind it is that you don’t have to waste money protecting parts of what you invented that don’t pan out (additional claims cost additional money beyond a certain number of claims). It’s not particularly fair, since you can watch what a competitor does (as Nintendo has done here), and essentially backdate a patent as though you had filed for it before the competitor did their thing.

Re: Nintendo Obtains New Anti-Palworld Patent and Seeks Even More

#60

Post by NotYourLawyer »

agubelu wrote: post #4

So Nintendo is claiming patent infringement for a patent that was registered after Palworld was released? It seems a bit nonsensical, am I understanding it correctly?

It could be a continuation application that claims priority to an earlier application.
Post reply on HN