Here is the patent if someone is interested:
this post was submitted on 13 Sep 2025
198 points (99.5% liked)
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
64175 readers
679 users here now
⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.
Rules • Full Version
1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy
2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote
3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs
4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others
Loot, Pillage, & Plunder
📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):
🏴☠️ Other communities
FUCK ADOBE!
Torrenting/P2P:
- !seedboxes@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !trackers@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !qbittorrent@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !libretorrent@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !soulseek@lemmy.dbzer0.com
Gaming:
- !steamdeckpirates@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !newyuzupiracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !switchpirates@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !3dspiracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !retropirates@lemmy.dbzer0.com
💰 Please help cover server costs.
 |
 |
|---|---|
| Ko-fi | Liberapay |
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Thanks. For everyone not used to reading patents - only the claims are relevant. To infringe, someone else needs to do exactly the same as they describe.
Claim 1:
What is claimed is:
- A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having stored therein a game program, the game program causing a processor of an information processing apparatus to execute: performing control of moving a player character on a field in a virtual space, based on a movement operation input; performing control of causing a sub character to appear on the field, based on a first operation input, and when an enemy character is placed at a location where the sub character is caused to appear, controlling a battle between the sub character and the enemy character by a first mode in which the battle proceeds based on an operation input, and when the enemy character is not placed at the location where the sub character is caused to appear, starting automatic control of automatically moving the sub character that has appeared; and performing control of moving the sub character in a predetermined direction on the field, based on a second operation input, and, when the enemy character is placed at a location of a designation, controlling a battle between the sub character and the enemy character by a second mode in which the battle automatically proceeds.
So... in more readable English, they patented how you can send a Pokemon out to run around with you, and if you throw it directly at an enemy it can start a standard battle where you control your Pokemon, otherwise it automatically paths to the enemy for an autobattle.
That's a little more specific than just summoning characters, but still absolutely bullshit to be able to patent. I'm sure there's prior work that should disqualify this, they just couched it in such overly technical terms they can act like it's novel.
The technical terms are actually how all patents are written, so nothing special there. I don't approve of things like this being patentable at all, but I actually expect this to be novel the way it's written.
However, no one needs to infringe upon it - it's trivial to change something ever so slightly so as to not do exactly what's described here.
A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having stored therein a game program, the game program causing a processor of an information processing apparatus to execute
A video game. Lol
Copyright already stifles innovation and creativity through it's overreaching. Now we get to see that with patents as well.
If you think this is the first time tech patents have stifled innovation unfairly, you must be new to this planet.
...and immediately sues every 911 dispatcher for patent infringement.
You are my hero today!
This is my comment of the day.
Somebody has to tell the WWE about the licensing costs for tag team wrestling.
Well this is about patents, not copyright, but yeah, fuck both
Copyright is mind numbingly stupid.
First thing that comes to mind is summoning a GF in final fantasy games...
persona?
this is out of line again from nintendo. why does no one push back?
Because there basically is no democratic method to influence what the Patent Office does.
Patent Office -> Department of Commerce -> President
Even without the current fascist in charge of the Executive branch... basically, the President would have to direct the Patent Office specifically, via Executive Order, or by firing it's head or other staff, or writing some kind of memorandum to give it some new kind of guidelines or specifically reject or approve a particular patent.
Barring that... someone or some entity has to either sue the Patent Office... or just sue over the patent infringement itself and try to argue up to a Circuit Court or the Supreme Court that the patent itself is ... dubious, in some kind of specific legal way that I do not know the word for.
i hope tieflings counter sue
Ok so...
Ridiculous, but possible loophole to this:
Stream the game over a network, from further away than your local wifi.
Or, ... uh... just the... 'PokeBattle' part... of the game.
Make that into a client-server type architecture.
The only references to networking in the patent are for Wifi LAN and a Switch 2 directly talking to another Switch 2, and this is only done to describe really the Switch 2 itself, without reference in that section to the 'non-transitory storage medium' which substantially comprises the basal step of the active functioning process which is being patented.
The 'non-transitory storage medium' itself is specified as the microsd card that goes into a Switch 2... but it seems that generally, this would seem to (???) cover any sort of persistent storage media/medium.
So... if you throw a non local network into this process... the relevant code/concept now goes through another step, networking or netcode, does not actually exist in or on the device's 'non-transitory storage medium' nor propogate throughout the rest of the computer sysyem in the manner described by the patent, which makes no reference to networking in the description of the functional process, which is based around the concept of the executed game code originating from non-transitory storage which is physically present in thr device...
... and is thus arguably a susbtantially different concept/process.
... and/or I have lost my mind.
This would be funny to try, have them fight and win? And immediately invalidate every single “familiar thing but on the internet” trash that the USPTO has been allowing for the past 30 years
I really have no idea.
And that's saying something, because I wrote a few papers, on the DMCA in particular, as well as how the copyright/patent system works (and should probably be reformed) specifically irt to computer software, whilst getting a BSc in Econ and a BA in Poli Sci...
... and ...
... just fuck all this, its so fucking obvious that the system is in so many ways just designed to work only for entities with stupendous amounts of money.