Yesterday, Gamesfray spotted that as of last week, Nintendo had secured US Patent 12,403,397, a patent that protects the game mechanic of "causing a sub-character to appear," or in other words, summoning a character, and "controlling a battle between the sub-character and the enemy character." Which is a long way of describing a classic Pokémon battle. You could also call it another patent in Nintendo's arsenal in its legal battle against Palworld maker, PocketPair.
It's also not the only patent that Nintendo has acquired, as it also secured US Patent 12,409,387, which protects mechanics around player characters riding other in-game "objects," which is another patent that fits right in its fight against PocketPair and Palworld.
No matter who is doing it, whether it's Nintendo, Warner Bros., or any other entity, it's never great to see videogame companies patent game mechanics. But according to IP and patent lawyer Kirk Sigmon, these latest patents go beyond the general level of ire that patenting game mechanics causes players. Speaking to PC Gamer, Sigmon doesn't mince words, saying, "Broadly, I don't disagree with the many online complaints about these Nintendo patents. They have been an embarrassing failure of the US patent system."
For Sigmon, it's not just the content of the patents and what they protect, it's how little of a fight the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) put up against Nintendo when it came to questioning and scrutinizing these patents.
"This seems like a situation where the USPTO essentially gave up and just allowed the case, assuming that the claims were narrow or specific enough to be new without evaluating them too closely. I strongly disagree with this result: In my view, these claims were in no way allowable...This allowance should not have happened, full stop."
An obvious issue with these patents that Sigmon also points out is that they don't just apply to Nintendo's fight with PocketPair. They can apply to scores of other games, and give large companies with deep legal departments too much power to threaten whoever they want whenever they see fit. For Sigmon, it's a warping of the patent system that he still believes in.
"The USPTO dropped the ball big time, and it's going to externalize a lot of uncertainty (and, potentially, litigation cost) onto developers and companies that do not deserve it...They were not made to allow a big player to game the system, get an overly broad patent that they should have never received in the first place, and then go around bullying would-be competition with the threat of a legally questionable lawsuit."
Securing patents that it could turn around and claim PocketPair is infringing on is right in-line with the 'hail mary' tactics Nintendo has been trying with its lawsuit against PocketPair and Palworld. This past July, reports surfaced of Nintendo adjusting existing patents to better align with its arguments against PocketPair.
As Sigmon points out, the most terrifying aspect of these patents is the precedent they set. It could be that these patents are rolled back if an Inter Partes Review case is successfully heard. But with how easily these patents went through, it doesn't seem worth it to put stock in the USPTO going through patents like this with a fine-tooth comb.
Follow Wccftech on Google to get more of our news coverage in your feeds.
