Video Games and Patenting Laws

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account

Gender: Xenomorph

Pronouns: Xe/Xer
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Aug 2, 2021
Thanks to the recent Nintendo-Palworld suit, I've been looking up some of the patents and some of this shit is downright insane.
1729625668857.png

The ‘7677976 patent describes a type of role-playing game where the user’s character has different attacks available that do different damages and have different effects (think Final Fantasy). The invention determines whether an attack is direct of a specific kind of attack. The invention also provides for a panic reaction where the player’s character’s attacks change depending on the level of panic the character is experiencing. If the panic is too high the user can neither attack nor defend against the enemy character. The player may also check the level of panic in the opposing character and strategically plan an attack against the enemy, creating more damage than a normal attack.

1729625712243.png

U.S. Patent No. 5,885,156 (the ‘156 Patent) describes a method for achieving experience points through dialog. The ‘156 Patent specifically relates to Konami’s Pawapuro or Power Pros series, which is a baseball game that features some role-playing game elements. Power Pros features a mode called “Success Mode,” which entailed users playing the life of an up-and-coming baseball player. Users start off with low stats and must train to become a better player. Part of the mode is managing the baseball player’s social life as well. The game generates random events that impact the baseball player’s stats. The ‘156 Patent describes the method of how the social events affect the player’s stats. For every random event, a set of options are given to the user, each generating a different outcome. The user earns experience points for choosing an option, but not every option is treated equally. Some options may give players more experience points than others, while some may hurt a player’s stats. Every play-through of “Success Mode” is different because the events are randomly generated.

1729625881699.png

U.S. Patent No. 6,595,858 (the ‘858 patent) relates to infection data for tracking whether or not captured characters in a game have been infected with a virus. The ‘858 patent details an image-display game system with information storage, having temporary storage including infection data regions where infection data is stored. The infection data is stored for every character captured during course of a game, indicating whether or not a character has been virus infected.
This shit's unreal. Basically any game is illegal and can be sued for $$$ at these big companies' discretion.
 
I think it was Squeenix or Capcom (maybe Sega?) started getting sue happy when they were in financial difficulty in the late 00s/early 10's to try to make up for lost revenue.

Iirc Sega in one instance sued whoever made Simpsons Hit n Run because... it had the arrow from Crazy Taxi pointing you where to go.

I know Squeenix has all its role playing gimmicks patented like ATB systems.
 
I cannot express my honest opinion on patenting game mechanics and people who patent them, without it sounding like a low effort fedpost.
 
I believe a lot of these are not enforceable or not in the way you'd think, unless you copy specific code or in its majority. If you implement a generic mechanic in your own way, their case might not hold in court.

We're talking about patents here, but you have to remember that Marvel/DC's "Super Hero" trademark was lost recently, I imagine if the patent is as blatant as this, and they dare to sue you, they might get an unpleasant surprise and a reality check.
 
It makes for a good incentive. I'm just glad they eventually expire. It's nowhere near as bad as trademarks or copyrights.
It worries me that you can make a patent, and block it off for years to come, without making a product.

I get it yhat there's gonna be a Chinese factory somewhere that's just gonna steal the design and produce millions, but that happens no matter what, especially if they are allowed to sell in the US.

And I get why they are there. It's just all so outdated and it just gets used to crush competition.
 
A notorious one was namcos patent on "loading screen mini-games" like tekkan having galiga in the loading screen. I'm doubting many games would have taken advantage of the concept but the idea that any of the many hours people spent on loading screens could have been filled with fun miniscule retro games really chaps the ass. It expired in 2015 right when loadings screen stop being so prevalent thanks to ssds. I remember saga having to fight to keep the Bayonetta loading screens that let you practice combos.
 
Last edited:
Patents and copyrights are stupid and out of control. No, you don't own broad ideas, and no, you can't take your idea with you to the grave +1000 years.

I thought that this was "Video Games and Parenting Laws" like how game age limits are legally enforced in places..
Interesting topic too, there should be more strict regulation in that regard.
 
Iirc Sega in one instance sued whoever made Simpsons Hit n Run because... it had the arrow from Crazy Taxi pointing you where to go.
It's an interesting lawsuit because even though that's the version most people claim, it's only half true. A floating arrow was one of many things listed that added up to that being what sunk them. Lots of games have had floating arrows and didn't get sued.


A kind of related famous case. id was sued for having a red cross on medkits. To me, this was a clout chase because they haven't sued any other game as far as I know. I heard during a Silent Hill 2 Remake review that misusing the Red Cross logo is technically a war crime. No idea if that's true, but that's a pretty steep escalation.
 
A kind of related famous case. id was sued for having a red cross on medkits. To me, this was a clout chase because they haven't sued any other game as far as I know. I heard during a Silent Hill 2 Remake review that misusing the Red Cross logo is technically a war crime. No idea if that's true, but that's a pretty steep escalation.
Yeah the red cross takes their symbol seriously because it's supposed to be an internationally recognized symbol where everyone has agreed not to kill the people or attack the place with that symbol. That's their reasoning anyway. It seems a bit over the top to me though when it comes to video games.
 
Patents in videogames are cancer and much like in the medical field they don't make sense given how quickly the technology develops. Seriously the difference between a game made in 1986 and one made in 2006 is insane.

A kind of related famous case. id was sued for having a red cross on medkits. To me, this was a clout chase because they haven't sued any other game as far as I know. I heard during a Silent Hill 2 Remake review that misusing the Red Cross logo is technically a war crime. No idea if that's true, but that's a pretty steep escalation.
I used to be a big red cross donor, I even donated blood for a couple of years because I believed they were making a good job. I started going on the fence when one of their former paramedics told me how much money the organization makes by bullying companies that use the red cross symbol with out-of-court settlements, I however stopped altogether once I heard about the case against prison architect.

Do you see the red cross here?
prison-architect.jpg


Let me amp the resolution and clean up the image a little bit
ambulance.png


That's it, those 5 pixels that don't even render properly at lower resolutions was enough to extort the devs for money, after hearing about this particular case I decided the red cross would most likely be fine without my donations.
 
It's less a vidya game and more of a 3d chat room, but the patents revolving around Worlds.com are similarly bullshit, and the story goes the creator of the game/holder of the patents basically used the lifespan of the patents he got for shit like the software for the service's UI, ways people interact, etc to troll other attempts at online games, and basically made his living off of it till they expired.

Descriptions of patents (Archive) It's the top three in this page that relate to Worlds.com

Images of one such patent "Scalable virtual world chat client-server system" and summarized description
1729651787372.png 1729651808008.png
1729651846189.png 1729651871042.png 1729651893945.png
Abstract:
The present invention provides a highly scalable architecture for a three-dimensional graphical, multi-user, interactive virtual world system. A plurality of users can interact in the three-dimensional, computer-generated graphical space where each user executes a client process to view a virtual world from the perspective of that user. The virtual world shows avatars representing the other users who are neighbors of the user viewing the virtual world. In order that the view can be updated to reflect the motion of the remote user's avatars, motion information is transmitted to a central server which provides position updates to client processes for neighbors of the user at that client process. The client process also uses an environment database to determine which background objects to render as well as to limit the movement of the user's avatar.
(Archive)

The penguins shown in Fig 1 and 5 are the default avatars of the service.

Edit: I'm not entirely sure if Justia has the patent listed above, but it's got three different patents with the same name submitted on different dates, two of which are likely not yet expired. They also include some references that list NCsoft as a company that's been sued, they're a South Korea based game publisher currently responsible for Guild Wars and in the past had publishing rights to City of Heroes.
 
Last edited:
One thing about these video game patents is they expire much faster than copyrights do, it's almost pointless to even have these and shoots them in the foot. Once these patents expire, their contents officially become public domain and it will be legally official. Anybody will be able to make a Pokemon style game in just a couple of years and they won't have leg to stand on.
 
Yeah the red cross takes their symbol seriously because it's supposed to be an internationally recognized symbol where everyone has agreed not to kill the people or attack the place with that symbol. That's their reasoning anyway. It seems a bit over the top to me though when it comes to video games.
If I ever make a game I'll be sure to include it in a way that triggers them, then.

Seriously the difference between a game made in 1986 and one made in 2006 is insane.
Same for '86 & '96, NES vs N64 is a crazy difference.
 
Back
Top Bottom