Looking up those patents, the first alludes to a system where a player aims and fires an “item” toward a character in a field, and in doing so triggers combat, and then dives into extraordinary intricacies about switching between modes within this. The second is very similar, but seems more directly focused on tweaking previous patents to including being able to capture Pokémon in the wild, rather than only during battle. The third, rather wildly, seems to be trying to claim a modification to the invention of riding creatures in an open world and being able to transition between them easily.

      • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        4 days ago

        Patents shouldn’t exist! Mostly.

        We had a history before patents/copyright were enforced. It was pretty brutal for anyone trying to make a living with their creations. Take a look and see if you want to return to that.

        • Grass@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          30
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          yeah now its brutal for anyone trying to make a living and excellent for anyone who already inherited a living and has more money than they could use in multiple lifetimes. I’d hate to go back to when it was just brutal for anyone trying to make a living.

          • otp@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 days ago

            I think the problem would be similar. The rich and powerful would be the only ones to profit off of inventions and innovations.

            We still have indie game devs today. Imagine if any company could just copy an indie game and scale it up/polish a bit and get all the sales.

            • Riskable@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              21 hours ago

              Imagine if any company could just copy an indie game and scale it up/polish a bit and get all the sales.

              You’re describing the entire mobile games industry. You think all those top apps in the app stores are 100% original? No. They copied other games.

              Also, patents have nothing to do with that. Software is covered by copyright.

              Furthermore, “back in the day” manufacturing was expensive and required huge factories to build stuff (in quantity). The barrier to entry was enormous! People were mostly uneducated and there was not much in the way of “shared engineering knowledge”. Ten thousand people could look at a car engine and have no friggin clue how it worked. That’s why patents were necessary: Disclosure

              These days disclosure has become irrelevant. Any engineer can look at an invention or product and figure out both how it works and how it was made. At the very least, they can figure out a way to make it. Just look at all the Youtube channels where every day people are making complicated machines, parts, and electronics! The mysteries are gone. Disclosure is unnecessary.

              Since the entire point of patents was disclosure why do we still need them?

          • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            3 days ago

            yeah now its brutal for anyone trying to make a living

            What patent or copyright is preventing you from making a living?

          • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            A shitty solution for a shitty situation is not a good solution

            Feel free to share your revolutionary idea that will still incentivize people to create without creating a “shitty situation”.

            • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              3 days ago

              I don’t need to come up with any revolutionary ideas, the open source folks are already creating without patenting their creations

              Here’s a revolutionary idea: universal basic income. No need to prevent other people from monetizing your idea if you don’t need to monetize your idea in the first place

              • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                3 days ago

                I don’t need to come up with any revolutionary ideas, the open source folks are already creating without patenting their creations

                The largest contributors to Open Source make their money from patents and other IP. As in, they can afford to give away lots of time and effort because they make their money with IP. If IP were to be eradicated as you’re proposing, all those contributions to Open Source by those largest contributors would evaporate. Here’s the largest Open Source contributors from 2017-2020.

                source

        • Aatube@kbin.melroy.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          I agree that it’s the best thing in capitalist society. I feel like if you think patents should exist, software patents should also exist, though.

          • Riskable@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            21 hours ago

            Why? Software patents are already covered by copyright. Anyone can write software and they automatically get assigned the copyright for it. The barrier to entry is basically zero since everyone has a computer and nearly anyone can learn to program by simply taking the time to do so.

            I mean, I also don’t think patents should exist in general but there’s a pretty clear difference between software and things in the physical world. Software is “just math”. And I mean that literally: 100% of all software that exists can be reduced to math that you could–in theory–perform with a pencil and paper.

            There’s a lot of reasons why software patents shouldn’t exist far beyond the scope of patents in general.

            • Aatube@kbin.melroy.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              20 hours ago

              Copyright only prevents you from copying code, not copying the design. Patents are meant to protect design. I also agree that software patents shouldn’t go beyond normal patents or protect overgeneralized stuff with prior art.

      • TheEighthDoctor@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        Patents are not the problem, they serve as a way to share the knowledge of a creation with everyone while protecting your company for a REASONABLE TIME to compensate for the RnD costs.

        The problem is the distortion of the concept to fit late stage capitalism delights.

    • ouch@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      I concur. I hope this goes to court and the judge throws those patents out.

      • merthyr1831@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        that’s the only hope, because Nintendo knows that as long as it goes to court, they can bleed out the palworld developers with endless legal attrition. I’m sure they know that these patents aren’t concrete; they’re just an easy way to drag people to court who can’t afford to fight back