• Agent Karyo@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    2 months ago

    Without going through all of their patent filings no one can. So again, that is the point. Lack of info

    We are both gamers (I am assuming this is true for you since you’re commenting here). I am not talking about legal understanding of Japanese patent law. Just a practical evaluation of Palworld vis-a-vis Nintendo products. What genuine technical innovation (I am not talking about bullshit patents for stuff that was implemented many decades ago) do you see in Nintendo’s products that was copied by Palworld?

    This is not difficult.

    Never said a ban on commentary, just hate bullshit articles.

    The implication of thread OP was that articles critical of Nintendo (in the context of this case) should not be published as of today, no? Why is any commentary immediately categorized as “greedy clickbait” or “rehashed content”?

    Something I agree with you on. Let them fight. This discussion is in the context of bullshit articles with zero information.

    I would argue it’s not a bullshit article as I have yet to hear a single example of what legitimate (in the real sense, not related to Japanese patent law) case Nintendo has. What is this magical innovation that we see in Nintendo products that was copied by Palworld?