I would imagine the 3rd patent at the very least should be invalidated - riding characters in video games predates Pokemon (MegaMan riding Rush comes to mind, as well as World of Warcraft [although I don't know if the patent predates WOW mounts]). However the nature of patents is that once they're granted they are very difficult to dismiss.

The other two are more tricky. Throwing balls at something us a uniquely Pokémon idea, I think, and the aiming one would come down to the technicalities of the patent itself, which is all Japanese to me.

[–] MrScottyTay@sh.itjust.works 20 points 6 days ago (3 children)

I'm pretty certain these patents are actually relatively new, keep that in mind too

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 7 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Yeah the newer they are, the more frivolous they are - especially since you could argue the release of games using those patents amounts to public disclosure.

However, you're still left in the situation where an established patent is very solid and difficult to challenge, even when it should never have been granted in the first place.

[–] DoucheBagMcSwag@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

They also filled these in Japanese court where Nintendos success affects their economy greatly

Remember how apple won every fucking lawsuit against Samsung back in the day because they filled them in California?

The court is going to be pressured by outside forces to rule in Nintendo's favor to avoid the stock market having issues there

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (2 replies)