Palworld developer, Pocketpair, has challenged the lawsuit filed by Nintendo and The Pokémon Company claiming the breakout title infringed on its intellectual property. In defense, Pocketpair highlighted several other video games that used similar mechanics to Palworld which were not hit with a similar lawsuit.
Months after Palworld was released, Nintendo and The Pokémon Company filed a lawsuit claiming the monster-hunting title infringed on three patents. Pocketpair’s defense was captured by Games Fray. According to a series of preparatory briefs filed in February, Pocketpair argued that the patent-in-suit shouldn’t have been granted since several games used the same mechanics before Nintendo claimed to have invented them.
ALSO READ: Mafia: The Old Country Release Date Accidentally Shared Online
Pocketpair carpeted the patent about capturing characters by releasing fighting characters (monsters) or capture balls by pointing out that its previous game Craftopia, used the same mechanics. It went ahead to list Titanfall 2, Rune Factory 5, and Pikmin 3 Deluxe as some of the games where players can capture and release a monster or an item (e.g. a ball) in any direction by releasing a button.
How what constitutes an invention is viewed in the United States, Europe, and Asia differ. For example, in the United States, developers must meet a “nonobviousness requirement” for a piece to be considered an invention. In Japan and Europe, there must be an “inventive step” in combining two art pieces for it to be considered new.
Pocketpair noted that Tomb Raider, Far Cry 5, and Pikmin 3 have all featured different types of throwable objects while Monster Super League, Octopath Traveler, Final Fantasy XIV, and Pocket Souls allow players to pick out a target and indicate the likelihood of the capture operation to be successful.
Defending a third patent infringement claim concerning capturing characters, Pocketpair listed a flurry of titles including Monster Super League, Nexomon, Pikmin 3 Deluxe, Craftopia, the Nukamon mod for Fallout, and others as having featured a similar mechanic.
Will Palworld’s non-infringement argument triumph?
Pocketpair has argued invalidity, meaning that the patents Nintendo claimed to own were never their innovation. This argument puts them in a better position since there is no offense for infringing on an invalid patent. If that is not successful, they still need to argue non-infringement.
ALSO READ: How To Stop Sweaty Hands When Gaming—9 Tricks
Pocketpair’s first argument was that Palworld and Pokémon were not in the same genre. While the former is a survival crafting game, the latter is a role-playing game. However, the report pointed out that this is not a valid legal argument, but it helps to shed more light on their different game mechanics.
Do you think Pocketpair has an argument strong enough to sway the judge’s decision in their favor? Share your thoughts in the comment box below.
