LogInSuing Palworld might become more difficult but not impossible.
As Nintendo continues waging lawfare against Palworld developer Pocketpair, accusing the AA studio of infringing on patents filed only after Palworld's release, a recent development has stolen the headlines regarding 22 out of 23 claims from Nintendo's latest recent application being rejected by examiners, handing the gaming giant an apparent loss. In response, Japanese patent attorney Kiyoshi Kurihara has stepped in to defend Nintendo, explaining in a detailed write-up why only one claim surviving in the end is actually not a big deal and isn't as sensational as it might seem for the uninitiated.
Pocketpair
Shared on Yahoo Japan, Kurihara's objection clarifies that while the patent application US20240286040A1, which pertains to the concept of players riding characters, did have 22 out of 23 claims dismissed as unpatentable by the US Patent Office, this is unlikely to be a problem for Nintendo, as patent applications typically include multiple claims ranging from broad to narrow.
"This case is a common pattern in which 22 claims were rejected because they were too broad, leaving only one claim to survive," reads the attorney's report. "If the application is amended to focus on the one claim that was not rejected, it will be possible to continue the application or fight the rejected claim further in an appeal."
In most cases, Kurihara explains, broader claims are usually found to be unpatentable due to not being novel enough, while narrower ones still have the chance to get approval from the commission even if they are a part of the same application. In this case, the application as a whole can still be granted a patent if the broad claims are removed through amendments, securing the associated rights for Nintendo.
For those siding with Pocketpair in this David vs. Goliath-like legal battle and critical of Nintendo's usual tactics – seen by many as overly harsh and aggressive – there's a silver lining, as the lawyer's analysis concludes by saying that "it is possible that enforcing rights against Palworld has become more difficult because the scope of the claim was narrower than expected," and while this isn't a crushing defeat for Nintendo, it's far from a resounding victory the gaming giant probably hoped for.
So, what do you think about the Nintendo vs. Pocketpair case? Whose side are you on? Leave your thoughts down in the comments!
Don't forget to join our 80 Level Talent platform and our new Discord server, follow us on Instagram, Twitter, LinkedIn, Telegram, TikTok, and Threads, where we share breakdowns, the latest news, awesome artworks, and more.