Nintendo is stepping into unfamiliar territory in its ongoing legal battle against PocketPair. This company is famous for its Pokémon franchise. It is fighting to defend its patents in Japan. But recent moves, including rewriting one of its own patents mid-case, have raised questions about whether Nintendo’s case is as strong as it once appeared.
The lawsuit, first filed earlier this year, claims Palworld illegally uses mechanics including creature capturing and switching between mounts mid-air. Nintendo is demanding around $66,000 USD in damages across three Japanese patents, but the legal fight now seems more about protecting Pokémon’s dominance than financial compensation.
Palworld demonstrating their gliding and switching mechanic prior to Nintendo’s claims (Image credit: Indie Live Expo 2021)
Nintendo argues that Palworld copied the Pokémon formula, not just in style but in the systems that power the gameplay. The three filed patents include:
- Throwing capture devices (similar to Pokéballs or Pal Spheres) to collect creatures.
- Storing and managing captured creatures.
- Switching between different rideable creatures in mid-air, a mechanic that allows fluid movement across the game’s world.
PocketPair is denying any such activity as mentioned in Nintendo’s case. The developer has presented evidence showing Palworld showcased its mount-switching feature six months before Nintendo even filed the relevant patent.
They also added that other games use similar systems, yet Nintendo hasn’t taken legal action against them, so why only Palworld?. In law, this is called selective enforcement, when a company enforces its rights against one target but ignores others doing the same thing.
Nintendo’s “even when” gamble
The most surprising moment came when Nintendo revised one of the patents while the case was still ongoing, asking Japan’s Patent Office (JPO) to insert the phrase “even when” into its claim about switching mounts.
On paper, the change makes the patent broader, potentially allowing Nintendo to argue that any mid-air mount-switching mechanic violates its rights. But this is a risky strategy. Patent experts say rough language like “even when” is highly unusual. Because it can weaken a patent’s credibility. If a claim is too broad or unclear, courts may ignore it easily instead of taking charge.
Florian Mueller, a veteran IP consultant following the case, described the move as “bizarre.” He added,
“I’ve been following patent litigation for 15 years (for the better part of that period as a consultant) and have seen many claims that were amended, but I’ve never seen “even when” or “even if” in a patent claim. It’s bizarre.”
PocketPair’s legal team is expected to use this to their advantage, arguing that Nintendo’s rewrite proves the original claim wasn’t solid enough. They may also try to invalidate the new version entirely by pointing to prior examples of similar mechanics in other games.
Although Nintendo has secured four patents in the United States, it hasn’t filed a lawsuit there yet. One reason could be PocketPair’s ongoing adjustments to Palworld, which have made it harder to build a case.
In recent updates, the developer removed several features Nintendo could have targeted, which includes the gliding mechanic tied to Pal companions, mid-air mount switching, and the ability to summon captured creatures with thrown spheres.
Each of these changes blunts Nintendo’s claims and makes the game a moving target. If Nintendo brings the fight to U.S. courts, it may face the same uphill battle it’s facing in Japan.
While the $66,000 Nintendo has demanded for damages is a relatively small amount for a company of its size which indicates that it’s not a fight for money. The real value lies in the precedent it could set. By going after PocketPair, Nintendo could be trying to discourage indie developers from making games that feel even slightly like Pokémon. A win here would make it easier for Nintendo to use these patents to challenge future titles before they grow popular.
But this strategy may not be working as intended. Other monster-collecting games, like the upcoming Aniimo, continue development despite the lawsuit. Palworld is still rolling out major updates, including a new collaboration with Terraria, which shows that the game’s momentum hasn’t slowed.
Could Nintendo still win?
Nintendo’s history of legal victories can’t be ignored. The company has successfully shut down countless fan projects and clones in the past. If the courts uphold its patents as written, or allow the rewritten “even when” claims to stand, Nintendo could secure a win. Then, they’ll force PocketPair to pay damages or remove certain mechanics permanently.
In the past, the company relied heavily on copyright and trademark law to protect its franchises. Now, it’s relying on patents, a more technical and unpredictable area of law, where vague language and prior art can turn a case upside down.
For PocketPair, the fight is as much about survival as it is about setting a standard. If they can prove Nintendo’s patents are invalid or that Palworld predates or differs significantly from them it could discourage other large publishers from using patents as a weapon against indie developers.
No one knows yet how this battle will end. It could be a settlement, a court ruling, or Nintendo dropping the case.
But one thing is clear, Nintendo is rewriting a patent in the middle of the lawsuit because it wants to keep control over the monster-collecting genre. The company is ready to go far to protect its Pokémon franchise.
