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

An embarrassing failure of the US patent system: Nintendo's latest patents

pcgamer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 57 posts

Re: An embarrassing failure of the US patent system: Nintendo's latest patents

#21

Post by mort96 »

yepitwas wrote: post #19
basfo wrote: post #3

It’s strange that you can patent gameplay mechanics. After all, gameplay mechanics are what define a genre. It’s like in literature if someone could patent the idea of a detective investigating a murder. How could the "pokemon-like" genre even exist if you couldn’t create a game that uses “summoning and battling characters”? Even worse, that description alone applies to multiple genres... JRPGs, or even fighting game…

You can't, with board games. I'm not sure why you can with video games. (maybe it's one of those things where you "can't" but actually you can, if you have enough money to keep anyone from successfully challenging it because they can't afford to)

> maybe it's one of those things where you "can't" but actually you can

Like how you "can't" patent stuff with prior art but then, somehow, big companies seem to be granted patents for things with plenty of prior art all the time?

Re: An embarrassing failure of the US patent system: Nintendo's latest patents

#22

Post by mort96 »

mmmlinux wrote: post #15
basfo wrote: post #3

It’s strange that you can patent gameplay mechanics. After all, gameplay mechanics are what define a genre. It’s like in literature if someone could patent the idea of a detective investigating a murder. How could the "pokemon-like" genre even exist if you couldn’t create a game that uses “summoning and battling characters”? Even worse, that description alone applies to multiple genres... JRPGs, or even fighting game…

They don't want a "pokemon-like" genre to exist at all.

Who is "they"? Nintendo doesn't want it, sure. But why should we let Nintendo decide whether or not they want competitors? Why should the patent office not want a pokemon-like genre to exist?

It's not surprising that Nintendo wants to patent "summon creatures to fight for you" as a game mechanic, the surprising part is that the patent was granted.

Re: An embarrassing failure of the US patent system: Nintendo's latest patents

#23

Post by Kuyawa »

MattPalmer1086 wrote: post #18
silexia wrote: post #16

Patents themselves are anti-innovator and the entire system should be abolished. The work is what matters, not the idea.

If I come up with a much better way of doing something that is relatively easy to reimplement, there's no great incentive to come up with those ideas then. I'm not suggesting that the current patent system works well, but you are in danger of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

The incentive is in delivering first. When the free market saturates and profits are razor thin due to extreme competition, first movers always get the rewards of innovation

Re: An embarrassing failure of the US patent system: Nintendo's latest patents

#24

Post by Kranar »

mort96 wrote: post #21
yepitwas wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't, with board games. I'm not sure why you can with video games. (maybe it's one of those things where you "can't" but actually you can, if you have enough money to keep anyone from successfully challenging it because they can't afford to)

> maybe it's one of those things where you "can't" but actually you can Like how you "can't" patent stuff with prior art but then, somehow, big companies seem to be granted patents for things with plenty of prior art all the time?

Being granted a patent does not make it enforceable. Prior art is a defense against patent litigation.

Re: An embarrassing failure of the US patent system: Nintendo's latest patents

#25

Post by why_at »

I wonder if we need something like Anti-SLAPP[1] laws but for patents. If someone sues for infringing on an obviously BS patent there should be a way for the defendant to quickly resolve the case and recover any costs they incurred from the plaintiff. I'm not a lawyer or anything though so idk how or even if this would work.

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_against_publ...

Re: An embarrassing failure of the US patent system: Nintendo's latest patents

#26

Post by transcriptase »

Kuyawa wrote: post #23
MattPalmer1086 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I come up with a much better way of doing something that is relatively easy to reimplement, there's no great incentive to come up with those ideas then. I'm not suggesting that the current patent system works well, but you are in danger of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

The incentive is in delivering first. When the free market saturates and profits are razor thin due to extreme competition, first movers always get the rewards of innovation

For as long as it takes for a bigger fish to implement, which I’m sure would be hastened without any need to consider legality of doing so.

Re: An embarrassing failure of the US patent system: Nintendo's latest patents

#27

Post by bbanyc »

yepitwas wrote: post #19
basfo wrote: post #3

It’s strange that you can patent gameplay mechanics. After all, gameplay mechanics are what define a genre. It’s like in literature if someone could patent the idea of a detective investigating a murder. How could the "pokemon-like" genre even exist if you couldn’t create a game that uses “summoning and battling characters”? Even worse, that description alone applies to multiple genres... JRPGs, or even fighting game…

You can't, with board games. I'm not sure why you can with video games. (maybe it's one of those things where you "can't" but actually you can, if you have enough money to keep anyone from successfully challenging it because they can't afford to)

You very much can with board and card games. Monopoly was patented and so was Magic: the Gathering.

My question is whether this patent only covers specific game mechanics introduced in the most recent Pokemon game or whether it's broad enough to monopolize the entire genre. Because if a clone of the original Pokemon from 30 years ago (has it really been that long? I feel old) is infringing, then the patent is clearly invalid due to Nintendo's own prior art.

Re: An embarrassing failure of the US patent system: Nintendo's latest patents

#28

Post by dmoy »

mort96 wrote: post #21
yepitwas wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't, with board games. I'm not sure why you can with video games. (maybe it's one of those things where you "can't" but actually you can, if you have enough money to keep anyone from successfully challenging it because they can't afford to)

> maybe it's one of those things where you "can't" but actually you can Like how you "can't" patent stuff with prior art but then, somehow, big companies seem to be granted patents for things with plenty of prior art all the time?

Some of it is that "getting a patent" isn't always a high bar, and the real bar is "successfully using a patent in a lawsuit". Patent examiners don't have the time and resources to thoroughly vet every application, so there are a lot of patents granted that are pretty much worthless.

In this specific case I don't know. I would have to ask.

Re: An embarrassing failure of the US patent system: Nintendo's latest patents

#29

Post by transcriptase »

jasonhong wrote: post #14
robotnikman wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It makes me wonder, what's stopping someone from flooding the patent office with thousands of AI generated process/algorithm/software patents, and declaring them free to use for anybody? That's one way I could think of to protect games from being stifled by future patents.

It costs a non-trivial amount of money to file a patent in the USA

And even more to enforce it if granted. You can have all the patents in the world but with without being able to file against infringing parties they’re just documents.

Re: An embarrassing failure of the US patent system: Nintendo's latest patents

#30

Post by carom »

MattPalmer1086 wrote: post #18
silexia wrote: post #16

Patents themselves are anti-innovator and the entire system should be abolished. The work is what matters, not the idea.

If I come up with a much better way of doing something that is relatively easy to reimplement, there's no great incentive to come up with those ideas then. I'm not suggesting that the current patent system works well, but you are in danger of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

The incentives are very poor in art, yet artists still create. I don't need people making video games for the incentives, I want the artists.
Post reply on HN