Which pokemon already had till they started phoning it in too much.
Speaking of which, I don't think the lawfare will work out in the end. Not just because they chose patent not copyright to go after Palworld.
In the State of Play at the Tokyo game show, Sony announced Palworld is coming to PS5 so that says Sony lawyers think they can win their case so it's safe to sell them on PSN.
Personally I think said lawsuit is doomed because Nintendo filed their patent after the public release of palworld. But I don't know anything about the Japanese legal system. All I do know is that courts are corrupt tyrants just about everywhere.
For American Law, I don't think they'd have a case if it were copyright on the designs. The designs are sufficiently different, even if Archcast and Dev don't want to believe it.
I have no idea if Nintendo can actually prove a patent infringement at the moment, because there doesn't seem to be much in the way of the claim themselves.
Point of it isn't to win, its to bleed the smaller company dry of money as patent law is exceptionally obtuse and very expensive to litigate as a result
The existence of any alternative to Marxism is fascism. That's the literal definition they use and practice.
It isn't about whether they have an audience. It's about their obscene desire for a captive audience.
Which pokemon already had till they started phoning it in too much.
Speaking of which, I don't think the lawfare will work out in the end. Not just because they chose patent not copyright to go after Palworld.
In the State of Play at the Tokyo game show, Sony announced Palworld is coming to PS5 so that says Sony lawyers think they can win their case so it's safe to sell them on PSN.
Personally I think said lawsuit is doomed because Nintendo filed their patent after the public release of palworld. But I don't know anything about the Japanese legal system. All I do know is that courts are corrupt tyrants just about everywhere.
For American Law, I don't think they'd have a case if it were copyright on the designs. The designs are sufficiently different, even if Archcast and Dev don't want to believe it.
I have no idea if Nintendo can actually prove a patent infringement at the moment, because there doesn't seem to be much in the way of the claim themselves.
Point of it isn't to win, its to bleed the smaller company dry of money as patent law is exceptionally obtuse and very expensive to litigate as a result
Winning is an afterthought. The goal is the lawfare itself.