261
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 20 Sep 2024
261 points (94.8% liked)
Games
16407 readers
1062 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I think this is a bad take, and the interviewer seems to contradict himself. He suggests that Nintendo goes after companies who copy them, but also mentions another company they've sued for patent infringement for a game that didn't resemble any Nintendo property. So it seems like it has less to do with whether or not you "trigger the wrath of Nintendo", and more whether you use their patents or not.
It should be noted that this is all just conjecture from somebody not related to the case at all. Nothing in this interview reveals any details about the actual case in question.
Their patents are not for technological innovative things at all but are for things like "presenting a confirmation pop-up window after resuming a game from sleep” or for in a isometric game projecting a shadow for a character that's behind something so that the player know it's there.
They're the kind of obvious solutions that any expert in that domain would develop independently if asked to solve that problem, and patent applications for shit like that would be laughed out of the Patent Office anywhere else than Japan (and in the US before their Patent System went to shit in the late 90s).
I very much doubt this shit is valid in Europe unless there's some kind of Treaty that means Japanese patents also apply here. If taken to court in the US such patents would most likely be invalidated - the problem in the US is that the Patent Office will accept any old bollocks obvious to doman experts and containing zero innovation, not that Patent Law actually protects this shit and they will be upheld if somebody has the money needed to dispute them in to Court.
However this is Japan and the Japanese Patent System, so it's probably rotten to the core.