Nintendo’s ongoing legal tussle with Palworld has ignited the internet, drawing in both fervent supporters of the supposed underdog and long-time critics of Nintendo’s aggressive litigation tactics. The latest development? Reports surfaced that the gaming giant faced a significant blow in the United States, with 22 out of 23 patent claims rejected. But while this might sound like a decisive victory for Palworld, the reality is far more nuanced.
Patent Rejections: A Common Occurrence
The news, initially uncovered by GamesFray, spread quickly due to the perception that Nintendo had suffered a major setback. However, a deeper look into the matter, particularly insights from Japanese patent lawyer Kiyoshi Kurihara (via Yahoo Japan and Automaton), suggests that this is simply standard procedure in patent law.
Kurihara explains that broad claims in patent applications are frequently rejected for lacking novelty or inventiveness, while narrower, more specific claims have a better chance of approval. In this case, despite the term “final rejection,” Nintendo still retains the right to modify its application or appeal the decision. In short, the legal battle is far from over.
A Strategic Move, Not a Loss
Patent law operates much like a negotiation. GamesFray emphasizes that companies often submit patents with an extensive range of claims, knowing that some will be denied. This strategy ensures that even if multiple claims fail, a few may survive and still provide legal leverage. A 2015 study even found that only 11.4% of patents in the U.S. were granted without any initial rejections, underscoring how common this process is.
For Nintendo, a company with deep pockets and a vested interest in protecting its IP, this initial rejection is unlikely to deter further legal action. Filing broad claims first is akin to starting high in a bargaining process—if you have the resources, there’s no reason not to try.
What’s Next?
While this news has been celebrated by Palworld fans, it’s important to remember that Nintendo still has legal avenues to pursue. The rejected claims can be revised, new applications can be filed, and appeals can be made. This fight isn’t over, and the real impact will be seen in the long run, depending on how both Nintendo and Palworld’s developers respond.
For now, this is just another chapter in the long history of corporate legal battles in gaming—one that’s far from reaching its final conclusion.
