Bloody Hell, Nintendo: The 'Summon and Fight' Patent That's Got Everyone Scratching Their Heads
AI Gaming News Author · IGN South Africa ·
Nintendo has secured a controversial patent for 'summoning a character and letting it fight,' a mechanic common in many games, drawing criticism from IP lawyers who call it overly broad and a threat to industry innovation, especially as it relates to their ongoing lawsuit with Palworld developer Pocketpair.
Right, so you know how sometimes you try to cast a simple spell, and instead of lighting a candle, you accidentally turn your neighbour's cat into a sentient, jazz-playing teacup? Well, Nintendo just pulled something similarly eyebrow-raising in the patent office, and it's got the entire gaming world, and a fair few IP lawyers, wondering if they’ve had a few too many Super Mushrooms.
Apparently, Nintendo has been granted U.S. Patent No. 12,403,397 – a patent revolving around *checks notes*... summoning a character and letting it fight. Yes, mate, you heard that right. According to Games Fray, this gem sailed through the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office "without any objection," which frankly, makes me wonder what kind of digital tea leaves they're reading over there. The patent, filed in 2023, ostensibly covers a technique that, let’s be honest, pretty much sums up how Pokémon games have worked for decades: you summon your little monster-pal, it battles another monster-pal, and if you’re lucky, you add it to your collection.
But here’s the kicker: this isn’t just about Pokémon. The gaming world is positively brimming with titles that use similar core mechanics. We're talking Persona with its demon summoning, Digimon and its digital companions, and if you're feeling particularly arcane, even Elden Ring with its spirit ashes. The idea that this particular flavour of monster-wrangling could be locked behind a patent is, frankly, a bit bonkers. As Games Fray astutely pointed out, this patent "poses a fundamental threat to creativity and innovation in the games industry." Sounds a bit dramatic, sure, but when you look at the specifics, you start to see the potential for a real mess.
The patent lays out a series of conditions – and believe me, it reads like a magic scroll penned by a particularly pedantic wizard: you need a PC/console, a game stored on a drive, the ability to move a player character, and then... the summoning of a "sub character" (their delightful term for your little monster). From there, the logic branches like a poorly debugged quest line: either you summon the sub character where another character *already* is for an immediate scrap, or you summon it in an empty space before sending it off to automatically battle. It's a precise, almost clinical definition of a mechanic that’s about as fundamental to monster-battling games as jumping is to platformers.
Now, the timing of all this is where the plot thickens like a potion left too long on the boil. This patent arrived right in the thick of Nintendo’s ongoing legal skirmish with Pocketpair, the mad lads behind *Palworld*. Remember that whole kerfuffle? The “Pokémon with guns” phenomenon that took the world by storm? Well, it seems Nintendo wasn’t just sending cease-and-desist letters; they were also busy in the patent office, seemingly trying to retroactively brick-wall Pocketpair’s approach.
IP experts, bless their cotton socks, have been vocal in their disapproval. Florian Mueller, a respected IP guru, took to social media to declare that Nintendo “should never” have received such a patent in the first place, calling it “outrageous.” Video game patent lawyer Kirk Sigmon chimed in to PC Gamer, stating unequivocally that “these claims were in no way allowable.” It's like trying to patent the concept of 'fun' – utterly baffling. Don McGowan, who used to be the chief legal officer at The Pokémon Company, went even further, telling Eurogamer he reckons the patent will likely be ignored. "I wish Nintendo and Pokémon good luck when the first other developer just entirely ignores this patent and, if those companies sue that developer, the developer shows decades of prior art," he said. He compared it to Bandai Namco's infamous loading screen patent, which was ultimately unenforceable due to, you guessed it, prior art.
And it’s not just this one patent. Nintendo also snagged U.S. Patent No. 12,409,387, which pertains to the "smooth switching of riding objects" – probably a nice, polite way of saying 'swapping between your flying mounts without a hitch.' This joins a whole suite of patents, including one protecting the mechanic of using a "capture item" to snare characters. A Poké Ball, in other words. Clearly, Nintendo is playing a long game of legal chess, aiming to protect its intellectual turf with everything from monster-catching to monster-riding.
What’s truly fascinating is how Nintendo has been playing the game *after* Palworld hit the scene. Their lawsuit against Pocketpair highlighted three patents from the Japan Patent Office: two for monster capture/release and one for riding characters. All three were filed in 2024, post-Palworld launch, but – and this is key – they were derived from earlier Nintendo patents dating back to 2021. So, it appears Nintendo saw *Palworld* thriving, then filed *divisional patents* specifically tailored to fight what they saw as infringements of their original, broader concepts. It’s a bit like retroactively claiming you invented the wheel because you patented a specific type of tyre five years ago, and now someone else has made a better wheelbarrow.
Poor Pocketpair has been scrambling. Their November 2024 patch removed the ability to summon Pals by throwing Pokéball-like spheres; now they just magically materialise. Then, in May, they tweaked gliding mechanics so you don’t directly grab onto a Glider Pal, but rather use Pal-buffed glider *equipment*. And just for good measure, Nintendo and The Pokémon Company *reworded* one of their patents in July. It's a dizzying dance of legal acrobatics, with developers trying to avoid tripping over unseen tripwires.
John “Bucky” Buckley, Pocketpair’s communications director, candidly admitted at GDC that the lawsuit "came as a shock" and was "something that no one even considered." It's a stark reminder that even with genuinely innovative ideas, smaller studios can find themselves in a legal maelstrom, navigating patents that feel as broad as the digital sky itself. While Pocketpair has debunked AI accusations and retracted claims about stolen models, the patent situation is a whole different beast.
So, what does this all mean for us curious gamers and the wider industry? On one hand, you’ve got the titans of gaming understandably wanting to protect their creations. On the other, you have this gnawing concern that overly broad patents could stifle the very creativity that makes gaming so brilliant. Will this patent be used to squash genuinely innovative indie games? Or will it, as some experts predict, be seen for what it is – a bold but ultimately unenforceable grab for a core game mechanic that predates most of us?
It’s a bizarre chapter in gaming’s legal history, a conjuring trick that feels less like innovation and more like an attempt to copyright the very essence of imaginative play. Here's hoping common sense (and prior art) prevails, and we can all get back to summoning our digital mates for a bit of a scrap without needing a lawyer on standby.
*This spirited dive into Nintendo's latest patent claims was inspired by the original reporting from IGN South Africa. Big thanks to Wesley Yin-Poole and the team for their excellent work in uncovering the details of this peculiar legal development.*
Tags: gaming industry, patent law, nintendo, palworld, game development
Original article: IGN South Africa