Comment on Nintendo's lawsuit against Palworld isn't just bad for the industry, it's bad for Nintendo

• Agent_Karyo@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  I would argue we do have enough information to have a take on it. What legitimate patent infringement case do you see in context of Palworld and Nintendo’s products? Be clear and specific.

  If you’re going to call for a ban on commentary, you need to have some of argument.

  From my perspective, it is crazy to defend some random corporation in this way when you can’t even come up with a basic explanation of why critical commentary is not justified at this stage.

  source

  • slazer2au@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    What legitimate patent infringement case do you see in context of Palworld and Nintendo’s products? Be clear and specific.

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

    If you’re going to call for a ban on commentary, you need to have some of argument.

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

    From my perspective, it is crazy to defend some random corporation

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

    source

    • Agent_Karyo@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ 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      The implication of thread OP was that articles critical of Nintendo (in the context of this case) should not be published as of today, no?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?

      source
  • GBU_28@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    Lol it’s not a ban, it’s a comment that suggests these articles are of poor quality

    source