• CosmoNova@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Except they didn’t steal designs and I’m pretty sure art direction can’t be protected. Even if it could, it would be morally questionable at best. The whole lawsuit also isn’t about that but about some really fringe patents on Nintendo’s part. Patents that Nintendo certainly didn’t come up with, shouldn’t have and last but not least threaten smaller studios in the game industry. Since Pocketpal teamed up with Sony, I don’t consider them indie anymore but it’s true that they have to win this lawsuit for indie devs regardless. If Nintendo gets away with this you can say farewell to smaller game studios in Japan.

    • dan@upvote.au
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      9 hours ago

      The fact that Nintendo are going for a patent claim rather than a copyright claim makes me think that they don’t think a copyright claim would be successful.

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

        Nor should it be. The standard for copyright violation is pretty high, things don’t have to just look similar, they need to actually match, so there’s no copyright over the idea of cute, Japanese-themed monsters, especially with other Japanese-themed monster games/shows like Digimon. Even if they matched the art style, you can’t copyright art style, you can only copyright the art itself.

        • dan@upvote.au
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 minutes ago

          Right. I just feel like they’ll find it even harder to successfully sue over patents, especially if the patents are fairly generic. The defendants just need to find prior art that predates Nintendo’s patents. It’s weird that Nintendo aren’t saying which patents are being violated.