Why Pokémon Didn't Sue PalWorld Over Copyright 

Long story short, it's not pokemon. They don't use any pokemon.

Well... about that...

Frankly, Palworld is doing something that the fans of the Pokemon series have asked for forever now. Not the "with guns" part necessarily, but adding new and different concepts instead of just cloning the same game over and over but with more monsters each time.

If Nintendo had anything to sue them for, then they would have done so 2 years ago when the game was announced. Edit: They are apparently suing Palworld over a patent now. Going to be interesting to find out what it is about, because since it's a patent lawsuit, it's not gonna be about designs.

People don't realize that using their own characters and ideas allows them to "clone" any game, except for content from other games. Gameplay and genre can be freely used without even minimal copyright from Nintendo.

As a pokemon fan i immediately realized that pal world is more similar to Ark Survival than pokemon.

No one believed me when I said this: "Wrong, you can sue anyone for anything. If I was Nintendo, I'd sit back and watch the money printer print away, then take them for everything a year later. If you think Nintendo is just going to let them get away with this, you have no idea about their legal team. They will sue for anything; they probably make more money suing people than making games."

Let's be real here. Anyone can make a monster taming game, not just Pokémon. That's like Nintendo sueing Sega over Sonic because both Mario and Sonic are both platformer games.

I prefer the term "Monster Tamer" over "Mon-like". Calling the genre Mon-likes makes it harder for other games in the genre to escape from Pokémon's shadow and mon is just short for monster anyway.

If there's one thing I can give humans credit for, it's pushing the boundaries of getting away with things they explicitly told NOT to do.

What matters at the end of the day is that this is a competitor, and competition means better products. Also this game is definitely what N as a child was convinced the Pokemon world is like

Another way of putting it: Pikachu done in your own artstyle? Illegal. Cloning Pokemon's artstyle to make your own creature? Okay. Calling said creature a Pokemon? Illegal. Giving Pikachu blue fur, a beak, a beaver tail and koala ears? Okay. Doing it in Pokemon's artstyle? Also okay. Making a game around these creatures? Okay. Making a monster taming game around it? Okay. Calling that game Pokemon? Illegal. Not calling it Pokemon, but adding official Pokemon designs? Illegal. Adding official Pokemon in your own artstyle? Illegal. Changing their name before adding the Pokemon in your own artstyle? Risky. Making a Pokemon game, but not selling it for money? Risky. Receiving donations for making the game? Illegal. Paying other people with your own money to make a Pokemon game? Illegal. Making a Pokemon game, but getting donations for other semi-related projects? Extremely risky. Getting hired because of your experience making a fangame? Could count as making money off the IP. The Keyword is "could" Risky. Putting a Pokemon fangame on your resume? Risky. Making a Pokemon game, uploading footage of you making it and getting ad revenue from that? Could count as making money off the IP. Very Risky. Companies? Legally count as people. Are companies actually people? Legally irrelevant. Anything that's legal for you to do is legal for EA, Activision, Ubisoft, Epic Games, Microsoft, Disney, Warner Bros. and Amazon. Any rights you have also apply to a gigantic machine that can afford more lawyers than you. Companies don't just win legal cases by being proven innocent/proving their opponent guilty, they also win if their opponent goes bankrupt trying to fight a legal battle. Any rights you have are more powerful in the hands of a company.

Let’s face it, with over 1,000 Pokémon around, if you a made creature for a Pokémon-derivative game, somebody is gonna believe that it’s a rip-off of Pokémon.

Aged like milk

Pokemon fans forgot that SMT, Digimon, Monster Rancher, TemTem, that Rick and Morty mobile game exists

I hope Palworld gets big like really big and even better than Pokémon, So that Nintendo finally has some competition and makes their games better.

I would assume the survival and base building aspects also make it distinct from Pokemon, as you don't need to worry about that in Pokemon.

boy oh boy do I have something to tell you about that

Time to remake this video, as they are now being sued by Nintendo and the Pokémon Company.

This aged poorly.

This is actually pretty informative in general. It's interesting to know where the line begins and ends in copyrighting an idea in similar execution.

this aged like milk lol

There was a patent by Namco that was for minigames during a loading screen which ended in 2015. Which would have been helpful for GTA Online when you were stuck in the clouds. But now games load so fast they don't need loading screens.

Sounds like some game developers are looking at recent Pokémon games and thinking "I could do better than that". And they do. I hope Game Freak will try to make the next Pokémon games so much better that we go back to "Why would I play that monster-catching game when I could have more fun playing Pokémon".

Considering the death threats, this video is MUCH needed

One of the tests used to determine if a work constitutes copyright infringement is whether or not it risks impacting the original by directly competing with it. If Nintendo sued Pocketpair over Palworld, they would have to either claim they themselves were at least considering making a survival-crafting Pokemon game with gun violence, which everyone knows would never happen, or they would have to admit in court that Palworld's existence doesn't really hurt the Pokemon franchise, handing them a huge win.

Not quite the same thing, but I really wish Warner Bros' hadn't patented the Nemesis System for the Mordor games. It's such a neat idea that I wish other games could use.

Art style is not protected by law. There is actually alot of artists out there who think it is protected. Also PalWorld can arguably be a sort of parody which would then be protected under fair use similar to court rulings on pornographic depictions of otherwise copyrighted characters; Rule 34 is basically considered parody.

Pokemon doesn't own a Sub Genre the Monster Taming Genre actually predates Pokemon with Shin Megami Tensei actually not to mention a lot of Monster Taming Games range in different genres from a Metroidvania like Creature Keepers,RogueLite PatchQuest,Classic Pokemon Like Experience Coromon,and many more it is the most creative genre in my opinion not yo mention the Triple A Monster Taming Games like Dragon Quest Monsters/Jokers,Fossil Fighters which definitely deserves a Revival,Digimon,and Spectrobes.

I keep wiping my screen because of the smudge on his left shoulder...

I kind of like the idea of a few similar Pokemon look-alikes available to consumers. I feel the Pokemon games are slow to change partially because they're never challenged or in competition (e.g. Nintendo vs Sony vs Microsoft). I love playing Pokemon, but I've often wanted to try a monster-tamer game made by a larger company that isn't doing the same buggy game repeatedly for 25 years.

Pokemon cant sue Palworld Nintendo and Pokemon Company: Hold my beer.

Nintendogs defending billionaire company and pokemon games 😂😂😂😂

If you come up with your own "original animal" someone will come along and say its a pokemon.

Part of what makes Palworld's gameplay different is that you continuously play as the character in combat scenarios. I don't mean like in Legends Arceus, but you are actively engaging in battles by attacking as the human player along with the OPTION to also battle alongside your Pal creatures.

I don't think people have problems with the fact that there's someone who made a monster catching game or the "artstyle". That's not the point. I believe people have problems with the fact, that ideas and designs were copied and stolen - in many cases even 1:1. That's not an artstyle issue. There's no problem with getting a bit of inspiration from other games, but copy-paste is another story. AI might've been involved, too. Also, looking at the history of the company that made Palworld... well, it doesn't look like they like to work much, but rather just steal and make easy money from that. The problem isn't just, that these monsters look like Pokemon, it's that they are Pokemon - some with more changes, some with less. Apparently, Rowlet or Torchic are 1:1 copies, but not just their model, but even their animations, too. The audacity... So I believe they could get into trouble with that squint test for sure. But not only the squint test, I believe: As you said, it's fine to get inspiration, e.g. from another book, but it's not okay to just copy parts of it - aka. derivative work. Ideas are fine, but designs are copyright, and it's pretty obvious they didn't just mimic an artstyle. They just copied designs - as mentioned above, 1:1 in several cases. I think anyone who ever designed or created something original, if it's an idea or art or whatever, should be angry at the behaviour of this company. Additionally, anyone who cares about quality should, too. Because this game didn't take much effort, but only the hard work of copying someone else's homework. So in my opinion, they surely deserve to get sued to hell. Let them make the same game again but actually put effort into it and make original designs. I'd gladly spend money on that - not on that level of plagiarism though.

Man, this video aged well

This aged so poorly.

Nobody can "own" a genre.

Boy do i have some news for you .

Well, you were wrong. Another reason why folks should stop listening to RU-vidrs.

The problem with this video is that it states US and western copyright law and precedents. However, both Pocket Pair and Pokémon Company are based in Japan and that means if this case went to court, it would be Japanese court, acting according to Japanese copyright laws, which are way different than those we know in west. And, also, Japanese courts aren't bound by any precedent made in US or elsewhere in the world. Keep this in mind, when making jadgments.

We're toppling Disney and GameFreak this year. They'll have to resurrect Spectrobes to compete again.

Most people have a comically poor understanding of copyright laws, but they state their wrong understand with extreme confidence.

If they sue, the human pokemons is canon

Palworld has used similar designs to Pokemon BUT they haven’t used Pokemon. I heard a line - Pokemon own Wooloo but they can’t own the design of a basic cheep… And since Palworld uses their own looking sheep, it’s legal

This aged poorly😂😂😂

Another brilliant thing about adding guns into the mix is that it opens up the parody defense. In order to qualify as parody, you do have to have something to say about the original, but it doesn't have to be particularly sophisticated. Juxtaposing adorable pokemonesque designs with incredible violence is not only funny, it's funny specifically because it shines a light on how aggressively, almost pathologically family-friendly Pokemon is, and how that's kind of weird for a franchise that's ultimately about competing in superpowered cockfights.

Nintendo can patent their specific designs, not the general concept of monster collecting. Just like Toyota can patent a specific camry sedan, not the general concept of a sedan.

Interesting discussion on what Pokemon names are and aren't trademarked; I imagine it would be very hard to trademark names that are based on reasonably common terms, like Farfetch'd, Weezing, and Mew, or close to such terms, such as Skitty, Shellos, Ducklett, and so forth

Well…..

Today in things that did not age well…

One thing I was thinking about earlier, is Pokeballs. To me pokeballs act like traps from Ghostbusters, except for throwing the Trap under the creature, you throw the trap at the creature. That mechanic in Ghostbusters came out decade before Pokemon was a concept. A Pokeball is just an advanced ghost trap.

At this point, “using Twitter” is a red-flag for me. Such nasty people on that site/app. They can get bent.

Honestly when I first saw Grizzbolt. I thought it looked more like Totoro than a Pokemon

The first thing I saw of this game was an unknowing Vinny Vinesauce instinctively punching an approaching sheep in the face and laughing before proceeding to beat it up and roll it down a hill. No idea if the game is any good but I'm sure to remember it

One thing. Stop calling monster tamers "mon-likes" Tamer games have been around for way way longer than pokemon, and by calling all games "mon-like" your potentially just giving gamefreak more ammo to take these games down in court, since fans are calling games "mon-like" nintendo can then argue through the words of the fan base that these other monster tamers used their intellectual property to popularize their own game hence causing damage to the pokemon brand (no way is it true but it is a defence they can try when everyone is claiming other games are mon like)

This didn't age well.

Palworld is more like “ARK Survival with Pokémon” instead of Pokémon with Guns.

This is why larger companies have large legal teams and rarely, if ever, run into the same issue fan games and indie games run into. They can turn around and ask the legal team "We cool? We good?" and proceed if they get the thumbs up.

Haven't seen your videos in a long time nice to see them again

Imagine getting a Pokémon Go ad while watching a a Palworld video

Lmao, aged like milk since Pokemon just sued PalWorld

The problem Pokémon has with their case is that a whole lot, if not all then most, of the Pokémon are based on creatures or things found in the real world. Palworld can use the same case for the similarities that they’re both deriving inspiration from the same source.

Anyone remember monster rancher? How you put in CD rom disks to get monsters from them. It came out before pokemon. - Digimon isn't older. But... Megaevolution? Hmm... even pokemon takes ideas from similar stuff. Allot of the stuff Digimon did. Pokemon did later. - Remember the little collectible rubber monster in my pockets? - Pocket monsters 👻 pokemon.

My sone and I played it all weekend. It’s a phenomenal game. My son owns, at least, one copy of every Pokémon story game. He’s not old enough to have been around for them, but he asked for the older games for birthdays and Christmas. He loves Palworld. The only Pokémon game I’ve ever played was Pokken Tournament. It was fun. The game I remember was Monster Rancher, from the PS1 days. Every monster was hiding in one of your CDs. Pop it in the tray and see what you get… it was so great. Palworld hits me like that one. The fact I can play it with my sone makes it even better.

This aged bad

I find it really weird that so many Pokemon fans are upset by this game, when those same fans have been crying for something new for over a decade. You can still love Pokemon, and you can love this too. In fact, this game is good for Pokemon. This kind of popularity just shows that fans want more than what Game Freak is doing, and it should help push Pokemon in a new direction.

A former legal clerk in Nintendo legal department said he had seen over a thousand cases of Pokemon imitation games but only a few were successfully prosecuted for copyright infringement.

Here's what I think Nintendo: We're sueing Palworld for copying designs. Dragon Quest: Go on, keep talking, I'm liking where this is going on. Nintendo: Maybe not.

Y'all remember TemTem? That Not-Pokemon but with cards instead of balls? Yeah... As long as it's legally distinct _enough,_ the law can't do anything. There's a whole compilation of offbrand products you can find and laugh at. "It's not Pokemon, it's Mokepon. Go, Kicaphu, I choose you!"

At least the video got a boost in visits and engagement.

People forget there's many other monster games, Digimon, Monster Rancher, Yu-Gi-Oh, and Yo-kai Watch and many more. So there's plenty of sources to get create ideas from.

Pokemon doesn't own yellow animals.

Seeing pokemon fans seething so hard at this that they want Nintendo to sue is utterly hilarious.

LMAO

After watching dozens of mind numbing reaction/theory videos about the Palworld drama... I feel like my brain just drank a healing potion lol. Thank you for this based video :)

Sometimes the word "ripoff" gets used loosely It happens with pokemon/digimon (24+ years ongoing) It happens with Capcom/SNK/FGC It happens alot in the Shonen Anime community Because (popular) thing and Brand loyalty?

I’m here from the future where Pokémon HAS sued Pal World.

This aged like milk

Think the easiest comparison is old Saints row and GTA where everyone kept calling Saints Row "Just a GTA clone or Rip off"

Palworld is more similar to Ark than Pokemon.

It’s insane how people are defending an 88 billion dollar brand like Pokémon and seems hopeful that Nintendo will sue Palworld into the ground, they did the same thing with Monster Hunter Stories 1, Temtem, Nexomon and others, Pokémon fans have really become a cult over the past decade and everything has to be a copy of Pokémon or be review bombed and or DDoS attacked which has happened in the past. I have never seen such concentrated effort to prop up a video game franchise in the past despite the Call of Duty fans, the World of Warcraft apologists, or the League of Legends toxic community, Pokemon fans are hands down the most twisted and sick fandom I have yet to see, and I been playing video games for many years now.

When I see the actual gameplay it reminds me much more of Ark Survival Evolved than of anything else.

It's great that Palworld seems to be taking off too. Maybe Nintendo will actually spend time developing higher quality pokemon games if there's more competition

Thank you for educating more people on how copyright, trademarks, and pattens work. It’s important so people don’t overstep their legal boundaries when making their own works, especially with Mickey Mouse.

…..Yeah? This was pretty obvious. There are tons of other monster tamers that haven’t been sued so why should this one be?

This video drops hard now that Nintendo IS suing Palworld on patent infringement ...

I hope Palworld does well, Pokémon needs the competition.

I think studio ghibli is the one that gonna after them..i saw yellow totoro in the game lol..

I don't follow Pokemon that much but I have seen the gameplay footage here and there. When I saw the footage of palsworld, I was sure they literally took the pokemon models and put them in their game hence I was looking for an explanation on RU-vid. Your video made it clear that these are not real Pokemon but I think Palworld failed the squint test 100% as a casual gamer like me can't even tell the difference between creatures from these two games.

Aged poorly ngl

no one owns "throw a ball at a monster to catch it"

Palworld distinguishes itself from modern Pokemon IP by actually being a good game rather than just a lazy cash grab.

Pokémon just doesn’t own the concept of collecting and fighting with creatures. Games like PalWord and some others are mostly inspired by Pokémon and doing it’s own thing with it, not like actual fan games that are mostly rom hacks

Oh boy. This video aged BADLY.

The concept isn't the problem, that's legal, the bad part is that a lot of the pals use parts of Pokémon models in their own models. Its intellectual property theft.

If Palworld really takes off which I’m thinking it will, I really hope it’ll be a wake up call to GameFreak. Personally I’ve been having more fun with Palworld than I have with the last 4 generations of Pokémon.

Wasn’t Digimon a similar thing to Pokémon yet no law suits

And they just filed a lawsuit in Japan