209
Nintendo applying for anti-Palworld patents in the US with a whopping 22 out of 23 rejected, but "they are fighting"
(www.windowscentral.com)
this post was submitted on 13 Feb 2025
209 points (99.1% liked)
PC Gaming
9544 readers
1652 users here now
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It should be illegal to apply for patents with the express purpose of suing someone else over what is now prior art.
Pretty sure it is. The patent office will generally give you anything you want tho and let the expensive courts settle the fallout.
Kinda wild that they still rejected almost all of the patents tho, like holy shit that's impressively incompetent on Nintendo's part.
This. You don't "negotiate" with the Patent Office. The courts decide whether patent infringement has occurred. You "negotiate" with THEM.
Yes, but how does that make rich people more money?
It does? Rich people or companies they own might want to produce things that infringe on patents too; not obvious that this has anything to do with "rich people" one way or the other.
Nah, let them file all they want, so long as they pay for them. If they're bogus patents, they're rejected and it's basically just a money transfer to the patent office employees.