You're right, but it's still the same principle. Only the implementation can be patented, not the actual concept in itself. Which, given how different the 2 games are, is statistically impossible that they have the exact same code and implementation.
Considering Yu-Gi-Oh had that mechanic for monsters in defensive position, that must have expired at least 2 decades ago. Unless Yu-Gi-Oh's implementation was different enough that WotC's patent didn't apply.
Patent isn't the same as copyright. Gameplay mechanics can be patented in Japan, apparently. Pretty sure there are gameplay patents in the USA too.
You're right, but it's still the same principle. Only the implementation can be patented, not the actual concept in itself. Which, given how different the 2 games are, is statistically impossible that they have the exact same code and implementation.
You don't know the difference between patents and copyrights.
The implementation is copyrighted, aka the exact same code.
The concept is patented.
Patent infringement doesn't require copying code. It's about using a patented concept or method, even if implemented differently.
You can patent game play in the USA. Wizards of the Coast used to have a patent on turning a card 90 degrees. It has expired.
Considering Yu-Gi-Oh had that mechanic for monsters in defensive position, that must have expired at least 2 decades ago. Unless Yu-Gi-Oh's implementation was different enough that WotC's patent didn't apply.
Yeah it was different. The patent wasn't for a defensive position, more like when a card was was used up