Alright, here’s the gist of the situation.
Nintendo is suing the developers behind Palworld, the game that has been described as “Pokemon with guns” and have a VERY similar art style to the Pokemon games (the inspiration is quite obvious). Seemingly, the developers were careful enough to get past the legal hurdles of “trademark” and “copyright” by making sure their designs were “legally distinct”.
Patents was pretty much the only thing left for them to pursue legal action… and unfortunately, Nintendo has decided to pursue it for arguably petty reasons. The thing is, most patents are for things like GAME MECHANICS. On example of a patent I’ve seen cited is the “Nemesis System” from the Shadow of Mordor games.
The problem is that this could set a BIG legal precedent with a huge domino effect.
Considering how broadly defined they try to make patents, this could have some serious ramifications for what can be pursued. That being said, if the implementation of a mechanic into a game predates someone else filing it in the patent office (a definite requirement)… it’s probably safe.
There’s also a time-limit on patents, if I’m not mistaken, and it’s the shortest of all the different types IPs. A quick Google search says “20 years from date of filing”, though that’s specific to US law and there could be some variance with other countries. But still, that should help mitigate the issue somewhat.
Now, I’m no legal expert, so take what I’m writing with a healthy amount of skepticism.
But I think this is a case of Nintendo and the Pokemon Company trying to get their “pound of flesh” and protect the IP by whatever legal means they have available to them; no matter how you slice it, Palworld is too close for comfort when it comes to the art style. Unfortunately, the only thing they really have is patents, which is petty and could be cause larger issues with precedence.
The issue being settled out of court is probably the best result that could happen here, making this whole legal action a shot across the bow and hopefully a warning to all to not step on other IPs toes by making them “obviously inspired but legally distinct”.