From the moment that Palworld was publically unveiled, the comparisons of the game to Pokemon have been rampant. Despite that, Palworld's development team, Pocketpair, has stated that they're not concerned with any negative legal action, as the game is not infringing upon Pokemon, nor other IP copyrights. Meanwhile, the former legal team lead of The Pokemon Company expressed surprise at Palworld, saying he was surprised, "it got that far" when the game was released.

Further adding fuel to the fire was a Twitter user by the name of Byofrog, who began directly comparing Palworld models to Pokemon models, showing similarities between the two. While all of these comments and reactions have been from the public, Nintendo themselves haven't made any statement, until tonight. The Pokemon Company put out a short press release, specifically about Palworld. The full comment is as follows:

We have received many inquiries regarding another company’s game released in January 2024. We have not granted any permission for the use of Pokémon intellectual property or assets in that game. We intend to investigate and take appropriate measures to address any acts that infringe on intellectual property rights related to the Pokémon. We will continue to cherish and nurture each and every Pokémon and its world, and work to bring the world together through Pokémon in the future.

For now, there doesn't appear to be any immediate action that The Pokemon Company will take, but only time will tell if any sort of investigation leads to legal action.

Source

 

[The Catboy]

I should clarify, I mean monster catching/taming as a genre, where monster catching/taming is the main focus, not simply as a small aspect of a game. I'm sure there are many early examples of the latter, but the concept didn't seem to be that fleshed out to base an entire game around until Pokemon came along. Not familiar with most of the games you mentioned, though.

Tiger Electronics seemed more than capable of churning out LCD toys in far less time than that

SMT still has Pokémon beat as demon taming (monster taming) was/is a core element of the games

 

[DoctorBagPhD]

Palworld isn't exactly a good game but the fact it's as popular as it is says quite a lot about the state of Pokémon and how far it's fallen. Something like Palworld being competition should be fucking embarrassing and is hopefully a wake up call.

If Palworld stole content for its 'what if every early access survival game had pokemon' experience they deserve to feel the long, hard and thoroughly unlubricated legal retaliation that'll be coming their way, though.

 

[Bunjolio]

Palworld isn't exactly a good game but the fact it's as popular as it is says quite a lot about the state of Pokémon and how far it's fallen. Something like Palworld being competition should be fucking embarrassing and is hopefully a wake up call.

If Palworld stole content for its 'what if every early access survival game had pokemon' experience they deserve to feel the long, hard and thoroughly unlubricated legal retaliation that'll be coming their way, though.

im pretty sure its been proven they havent stolen content

 

[therabbitofthenorth]

im pretty sure its been proven they havent stolen content

Technically neither side can claim it’s been proven until it’s taken to a court of law.

However, the fact that Nintendo hasn’t already sent a DMCA/C&D shows it’s at least not immediately obvious infringement and requires further investigation. Certainly not what has been alleged by anonymous individuals on Twitter.

 

[Bladexdsl]

it gets even better

 

[HextarVigar]

it gets even better

It's PETA- people would forget they exist if they didn't shove their noses into situations they think they can somehow profit from.

 

[ShadowOne333]

it gets even better

...Veganuary?
Dafuq

Seriously people have way too much spare time on their hands.

 

[RandomUser]

Dragon Quest (Warriors) 4 in 1993 also had monster catching elements.
As I said before in this thread, Pokémon is far the first or original, it just won Capitalism.

Really? I must have somehow missed that when I played it multiple times in the past. I do however remember that you can recruit a monster or two as a party member.
Wasn't the DW4 released in 1992 and DQ4 in 1990?

 

[The Catboy]

Really? I must have somehow missed that when I played it multiple times in the past. I do however remember that you can recruit a monster or two as a party member.
Wasn't the DW4 released in 1992 and DQ4 in 1990?

I probably mixed up the years and names. It looks like it was 5. Ngl, trying to go off memory and Google was not my best move right after a surgery.
If I have anything wrong, please correct me, there’s a high chance my brain just kind of ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[SaberLilly]

so far the only legal thing to happen regarding nintendo and palworld was a pokemon mod getting taken down. Aside from that i love how Nintendo pretty much said "look we know this game exists, we know......stop telling us about it." Not that i expect big N to get rattled by this at all

 

[RandomUser]

I probably mixed up the years and names. It looks like it was 5. Ngl, trying to go off memory and Google was not my best move right after a surgery.
If I have anything wrong, please correct me, there’s a high chance my brain just kind of ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

No worries, it happens to me too. Sometimes I get brain fart as well .

 

[therabbitofthenorth]

It's PETA- people would forget they exist if they didn't shove their noses into situations they think they can somehow profit from.

What really killed me though is the “journalist” felt the need to *contact* PETA, as if their input has ever been valuable.

 

[DaniPoo]

Well it's pretty F*cking stupid of this company to make a game where you catch monsters using balls and to use a very Pokemon like style.. It's to be point where you can look at a monster and tell like "it's a Psyduck with the mouth of a Gengar and the ears of Lucario".

The first designs are probably AI generated and trained on actual Pokemon and then an artist refines them, that's my guess.

Of course this would happen and The Pokemon Company is most likely going to find problems with Palworld.

 

[SylverReZ]

it gets even better

Peta always responds to anything like this, of course. They even made game parodies based on Nintendo's franchises like Pokemon and Cooking Mama of all things. Didn't you know that they kill more animals than looking after them, its very sad and shameful. Fuck Peta.

 

[therabbitofthenorth]

Well it's pretty F*cking stupid of this company to make a game where you catch monsters using balls and to use a very Pokemon like style.. It's to be point where you can look at a monster and tell like "it's a Psyduck with the mouth of a Gengar and the ears of Lucario".

No one can own an art style, and Nintendo did not invent catching creatures in balls (nor can anyone own that either). As long as it’s clear they’re not TPC’s designs (which it is) and said designs pass the squint test (which they do), it makes Nintendo’s case a lot more difficult.

The first designs are probably AI generated and trained on actual Pokemon and then an artist refines them, that's my guess.

That guess is baseless and likely incorrect, by the way.

 

[Sd4930Ur]

I'm here on the internet site and I want and have to play the next Pokemon now. But I also have several other parts of the game to catch up on, so give me time, give me time

 

[VartioArtel]

Oh okay, that's not so bad, though it could still be misleading. For example, Palworld's "Pikachu" is more like a cross between Electabuzz and Pikachu, and its size is reflective of that. Shrinking it down to compare it would be disingenuous. Actually, now that I think about it, the closest thing the game has to Pikachu is a cat.

Seems he did at least apologize for the misleading comparisons, so I shouldn't be too harsh on him.

Size doesn't matter as much as 'shape'. There's something called the 'silhouette test', which is standard in game design. While not a hard rule, generally something shouldn't be easily mistakeable for something that already exists, if possible. If size mattered, someone could draw a mini version of any post-Steamboat Willy Micky Mouse and get away with it.

Saying "it's a mouse" for example wouldn't get someone safe when taking Pikachu's body 1:1, replacing its ears with a Dedenne, and its tail with a Marill. There's a point where it escapes believable 'inspiration' and risks entering 'plagiarism' or 'theft'.

The big problem is, it's not hard to change the topography (polygons) of a model, especially with 'tracing' methods or the sort. There's YT vids on changing topography. So it comes down to belief if something's stolen. Now, it's clear most are major 'distortions' of the designs. Some have different skeletons. Sure, you can say most are 'inspirations'.

Then there's the 'smoking gun' scenario.

Left is Azurobe's head. Right is Primarina's, with the 'hairbeads' removed. The shapes are too similar, scarily so, and to make it worse, at the same exact points on both models, there's the tufts of hair in the same general (not the exact, mind you) length and shape.

You can google them up individually if you care to check.

Why would they reconstruct these models to such precision? Think about that for a moment. Again, Byo admits to uniform scaling, and others have tested similar or even constructed similar.



Where there's smoke, there's likely fire. If the team's this 'new' that they didn't know what model rigs are (according to interview), how did they happen to make something this similar to a Pokemon's? Coincidence? Sure. I won't deny it. But this also calls into question ALL similar designs. Is it hard proof? No. But it sure is a plausibility.

Now, one person found something in the Palworld model files which isn't released YET(!) into the game, but it doesn't really add much in Palworld's favor.



PRESUMING this is real, it's more than a smoking gun, it's a campfire.

Edit: Seems it's more likely to be real. It's listed in the files as "Dark Mutant" (a naming scheme common to the Files in the folders). https://www.eurogamer.net/palworld-...iar-looking-pal-creature-in-its-code-fan-says

 

[Windsall]

Size doesn't matter as much as 'shape'. There's something called the 'silhouette test', which is standard in game design. While not a hard rule, generally something shouldn't be easily mistakeable for something that already exists, if possible. If size mattered, someone could draw a mini version of any post-Steamboat Willy Micky Mouse and get away with it.

Saying "it's a mouse" for example wouldn't get someone safe when taking Pikachu's body 1:1, replacing its ears with a Dedenne, and its tail with a Marill. There's a point where it escapes believable 'inspiration' and risks entering 'plagiarism' or 'theft'.

The big problem is, it's not hard to change the topography (polygons) of a model, especially with 'tracing' methods or the sort. There's YT vids on changing topography. So it comes down to belief if something's stolen. Now, it's clear most are major 'distortions' of the designs. Some have different skeletons. Sure, you can say most are 'inspirations'.

Then there's the 'smoking gun' scenario.

View attachment 416447
Left is Azurobe's head. Right is Primarina's, with the 'hairbeads' removed. The shapes are too similar, scarily so, and to make it worse, at the same exact points on both models, there's the tufts of hair in the same general (not the exact, mind you) length and shape.

You can google them up individually if you care to check.

Why would they reconstruct these models to such precision? Think about that for a moment. Again, Byo admits to uniform scaling, and others have tested similar or even constructed similar.



Where there's smoke, there's likely fire. If the team's this 'new' that they didn't know what model rigs are (according to interview), how did they happen to make something this similar to a Pokemon's? Coincidence? Sure. I won't deny it. But this also calls into question ALL similar designs. Is it hard proof? No. But it sure is a plausibility.

Now, one person found something in the Palworld model files which isn't released YET(!) into the game, but it doesn't really add much in Palworld's favor.



PRESUMING this is real, it's more than a smoking gun, it's a campfire.

Edit: Seems it's more likely to be real. It's listed in the files as "Dark Mutant" (a naming scheme common to the Files in the folders). https://www.eurogamer.net/palworld-...iar-looking-pal-creature-in-its-code-fan-says

It's interesting takes but If they deliberately tried to make them similar but different it's still not close enough to infringe on copyright. Unless obviously someone can prove they actually used pokemon models.
The mewtwo y knockoff kinda does add in their favor in a way, since there isn't a modern model for M2-y.
Makes me wonder about AI again though.

 

[VartioArtel]

It's interesting takes but If they deliberately tried to make them similar but different it's still not close enough to infringe on copyright. Unless obviously someone can prove they actually used pokemon models.
The mewtwo y knockoff kinda does add in their favor in a way, since there isn't a modern model for M2-y.
Makes me wonder about AI again though.

"Still not close enough"

By what banner?

Using Dark Mutant as a basis, they clearly use the same overall skeleton, they **literally** share the same animations.

Using the Primarina hair, it's literally 99:100 (not 1:1, but so similar it's impossible not to say it's not stolen).

If it was simply borrowing a trait within the design art, that's one thing. But these are clearly, and I don't mean it gently, I mean blatantly, traced or stolen models which have been re-topographized (which is indeed possible)

Those saying topography are different need to look at other details like animation skeletons (which... Dark Mutant/MM2Y are too damn similar), silhouettes, and designs overall.

Are ALL Palworld designs like this? No. Some are at **least** VERY heavily modified models, at the least. And some, like Warsect and Jormungandr, are fucking unique and pure baller. And I can't fault those. My issues come with those that look damningly similar. And as I said: there is the "Silhouette Test". And I doubt many would honestly not think "Mega Mewtwo Y" when looking at Dark Mutant, if they didn't know of Dark Mutant but knew of MM2Y.

If your argument is 'they changed some bits', does that make "Pinkachu" in this below post/animation legally okay because the base scaling dimensions for the file was smaller, and because they changed out the ears and tail (IE: removed Primarina's Beads, MM2Y's 'hoop' on the head, etc)?

Last I checked the conventional argument is 'no'. Because not enough has been changed for it to be considered a 'distinct' different design.

Edit: The Dark Mutant/Primarina Hair designs are both smoke. And where there's smoke, there's likely fire. Does it mean ALL of the designs similar to Pokemon are stolen? No. But it should HEAVILY increase the chances in your mind, and if it don't, it means there's a clear bias in your thinking that's preventing you acknowledging the possibility at least. If you still think it's not stolen, it's fine, but one should admit outright that the designs are at least suspect.

Edit 2: Primarina's hair alone is not copyrightable, but one needs to at least acknowledge the similarities are so absurd that it's unlikely that two 'unique' designs would share so many traits, dimensional consistency, and so little actual differences. That it's such a noticeable trait of Primarina that people automatically zoomed in on it on Azurobe says volumes. That it's so similar also speaks to how suspicious the entire situation is. It's not like the hair's a thunderbolt like Pikachu's tail, for example. That sort of design isn't common at all and it appearing with so many other Pokemon-like designs/models should be cause for awareness.

 

[Xzi]

Saying "it's a mouse" for example wouldn't get someone safe when taking Pikachu's body 1:1, replacing its ears with a Dedenne, and its tail with a Marill. There's a point where it escapes believable 'inspiration' and risks entering 'plagiarism' or 'theft'.

The issue is that there are two very different thresholds for what constitutes plagiarism/theft in the legal system, and for what will spur accusations of plagiarism/theft from people who have made Pokemon their entire personality.

Left is Azurobe's head. Right is Primarina's, with the 'hairbeads' removed. The shapes are too similar, scarily so, and to make it worse, at the same exact points on both models, there's the tufts of hair in the same general (not the exact, mind you) length and shape.

That's the type of thing that's wholly meaningless unless Nintendo/GameFreak has a copyright specifically on this model's hair. Azurobe is clearly inspired by both Primarina and Dragonair, but it also has distinctive features that set it apart from either one.

Atrio says "the bar has been lowered," but the reality is that the bar was always this low. The "feel" of modern Pokemon games comes down to barely more than generic Unity aesthetics, so I'm surprised nobody has attempted to mimic it before.

PRESUMING this is real, it's more than a smoking gun, it's a campfire.

Again, no. I count at least ten distinctive differences between the two, without even getting into the fact that one of them doesn't have a 3D model for reference. Do the devs want you to be able to look at their design and replace it in your head with a Pokemon if you want? Absolutely, that's something which is driving the success of the game. It's not legally actionable, however.

If your argument is 'they changed some bits', does that make "Pinkachu" in this below post/animation legally okay because the base scaling dimensions for the file was smaller, and because they changed out the ears and tail (IE: removed Primarina's Beads, MM2Y's 'hoop' on the head, etc)?

Palworld devs at the very least would've changed the shape of the head and arms/legs as well.