Palworld Is a Great Example Of The Idea/Expression Dichotomy
from the express-yourself dept
When it comes to copyright suits or conflicts that never should have existed, one of the most common misunderstandings that births them is not understanding the idea/expression dichotomy in copyright law. Even to most laypeople, once you explain it, it’s quite simple. You can copyright a specific expression of something, such as literature, recorded music, etc., but you cannot copyright a general idea. So, while Superman may be subject to copyright protections as a character and in depictions of that character, you cannot copyright a superhero that flies, wears a cape, shoots beams from his eyes, and has super strength. For evidence of that, see: Homelander from The Boys.
But while Homelander is a good case study in the protections offered by the idea/expression dichotomy, a more perfect one might be the recently released PC game Palworld, which has often been described as “Pokémon, but with guns.” This thing is a megahit already, hitting Early Access mid-January and also already hitting 1 million concurrent players. And if you’re wondering just how “Pokémon, but with guns” this game is, well…
The art styles are similar, it’s essentially a monster-collecting game involving battles, etc. and so on. You get it. And this has led to a whole lot of speculation out there that all of this somehow constitutes copyright infringement, or plagiarism, on the part of publisher PocketPair. There is likewise speculation that it’s only a matter of time before Nintendo, Game Freak, or The Pokémon Co. sues the hell out of PocketPair over all of this.
And that may still happen — the Pokemon company says it’s investigating Palworld. All of those companies have shown themselves to be voracious IP enforcers, after all. But the fact is that there is nothing in this game that is a direct copy of any expression owned by any of those entities. To that end, when asked about any concerns over lawsuits, PocketPair is taking a very confident posture.
On the other hand, we had a chance to talk to PocketPair’s CEO Takuro Mizobe before Palworld’s release, and addressing this topic, Mizobe mentioned that Palworld has cleared legal reviews, and that there has been no action taken against it by other companies. Mizobe shared PocketPair’s stance on the issue, stating, “We make our games very seriously, and we have absolutely no intention of infringing upon the intellectual property of other companies.”
Mizobe has also commented that, in his personal opinion, Palworld is not at all that similar to Pokémon, even citing other IPs that Palworld more closely resembles. (Related article) He encouraged users to see past the rumors and give Palworld a chance.
And he’s right. The game mechanics themselves go far beyond anything Pokémon has on offer. And while we can certainly say that even some of the Pals themselves look as though they were inspired by some well-known Pokémon, there are more than enough differences in sum-total to make any claim that this is some kind of direct ripoff simply untrue. Some of the ideas are very, very similar. The expression, however, is different.
In addition to the legal review that Mizobe mentioned, it’s not like the game as a concept has been kept a secret, either.
Though it released just a few days ago, Palworld’s concept and content has been open to the public for quite a while, and were even presented at the Tokyo Game Show in both 2022 and 2023. Many users are of the opinion that, if there were basis for plagiarism-related legal action, the relevant parties would have already acted by now.
I would normally agree, but in this case, well, it’s Pokémon and Nintendo, so who knows. Maybe legal action is coming, maybe not. If it does come, however, it should fail. And fail miserably. All because of the idea/expression dichotomy.
Filed Under: copyright, idea expression dichotomy, palworld, pokemon, pokemon with guns, video games
Companies: nintendo, pocketpair, pokemon company
Comments on “Palworld Is a Great Example Of The Idea/Expression Dichotomy”
Jurisdictions
Another thing to note is that nearly everyone on social media commenting about this are ignoring the fact the all of these companies are Japanese companies. US law is not the basis for action here, Japan IP laws are. While I am not well learned on those laws, Copyright law specifically in Japan does not have Fair Use, which so many people are claiming this could be.
Timothy’s point stands though, as idea/expression is still the actual heart of this entire issue. Bright, colorful cutesy monsters is an idea. Capturing them with devices is an idea. Names can be copyrighted, but as a part of the greater whole of a character. A blue Pikachu-style monster with Water-based powers called Bluble is not the same thing, just like Homelander is not Superman despite the red cape, blue bodysuit, muscular physique and super power set for both being aaaaaalmost the same.
The only “copying” Palworld seems to have done is stylistic and consists mainly of color palettes and powers. Sparkit is Palworld’s Pikachu but side by side the two characters are visually distinct. As for the general “Elements” involved, Rock-Paper-Scissors elemental wheels pre-date Pokemon and are also an idea, not an expression.
That said I still expect one or more of the companies involved with Pokémon to file a lawsuit on this. Not because they are draconian behemoths that love to over-protect their IP, but simply to draw a clear line in the sand for others who might think they can make a near-clone of Pokémon cause NinGameMon Co don’t care.
Or because the game makes Pokémon games look bad. 😀
Re:
Don’t worry.
Palworld is fine, Pokemon mods for Palworld aren’t. And, unfortunately, Nintendo has a… point there.
The cruelty the player can inflict on a Pal is… concerning and very much not something Nintendo does not want to associate with.
Which could be better served as a Press Announcement and not a lawyer’s letter, but Nintendo.
Re: Re:
The cruelty…
But yeah, Pokemon is just fine lol. ‘Cuz we’re used to it. Normalized, even. It’s cute!
Re:
“…Rock-Paper-Scissors elemental wheels pre-date Pokemon and are also an idea, not an expression.”
Good point. I remember Rock-Paper-Scissors featuring in Alex Kidd, and I’ve yet to see Sega suing Nintendo.
Re:
Japanese IP law makes American IP law look sane.
Re: Re:
It used to be the opposite, where Japanese IP law was pretty much the same but there was a huge Doujin (or fan-made) culture of independent and fan games which literally violated copyright of the major AAA studios and Anime/Manga creators but they didn’t sue because lawyers in Japan are soooooo expensive. I guess once © infringement became a criminal act in Japan that’s when the party stopped.
And I’m pretty sure Palworld hasn’t infringed one of the many patents Nintendo holds for minor game mechanics in Japan…
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
the rumour is
That there are palmon who’s models are too similar to Pokémon models for it to be coincidence.
How does techdirt feel about that? Where does slightly reskinning a model from another game sit in the idea/expression dichotomy?
(pretentious much?)
Re:
That claim was made from whole cloth: It’s a lie made by someone who has a grudge against Palworld.
Re: Re:
That’s misinformation purely based on supposed discord messages and mere use of the [i]scale tool[/i] on [i]3D models.[/i] There are other people who are doing independent investigation of the models and also finding notable similarities, including at least one model having an identical animation skeleton.
Re: Re: Re:
(Also wow I got my formatting mixed up, whoops.)
Re: Re: Re:2
Yup. This site accepts Markdown or HTML, not BBCode.
Re: Re: Re:
In regards to the animation skeleton, some of these are assets you can buy and there are even free ones.
And notable similarities are nothing strange when the creatures are based on animals and plants, there are a limited amount of variations you can derive from that source. For example, if an artist draw an anthropomorphized mouse it will have notable similarities to Mickey Mouse, has the artist then “borrowed” from Disney?
Satoshi Tajiri inspiration for the first Pokémon was from anime and his hobby of collecting insects which is why many Pokémon’s have a notable anime-influence with some of them are based on insects. Should anyone create a creature based on anime and insects it’ll have notable similarities to Satoshi’s work.
The whole premise here is that the “originalist creator” owns all aspects of something they created. In reality there is no such thing as an “originalist creator”, just an artist/creator who was influenced by already existing things and expressed it in their own way for the most part, and that means that only that specific expression in “theirs”.
Re: Re:
Sabroni is continuing evidence that IP maximalism is a degenerative mental disease that leaves the infected unable to function as a normal human being.
Re:
A rumour is not fact, nor is there any violation in having models that look similar, because that would be ridiculous. The Pokemon Company has copyright on specific expressions; those expressions haven’t been duplicated.
Re:
Disregarding the fact that the person who made that claim later admitted that they’d intentionally ignored obvious differences when making comparisons, then doubled down on their claims that the inconvenient omissions didn’t matter because they were making a point about virtual animal cruelty…
But when have copyright-types like sabroni ever let standards of evidence get in the way of a pro-IP rant?
Re: Re:
You think you’re funny as fuck don’t you?
Re: Re: Re:
And now you made it even funnier
While we’ve never really seen it at this scale before, this is actually a very common occurence for these types of games.
My pet theory is that pokemon has been so culturally dominant for so long that large parts of the gaming community don’t even process that “catch, tame and battle monsters” could even be a genre of games. Nearly every game that could be placed in a “monster taming” genre, is treated by the community as at best a questionably legal ripoff of pokemon. It doesn’t really matter what those games do (or don’t do) to differentiate themselves, it’s a universal experience.
It’s an interesting contrast to roguelike, metroidvania, and soulslike games. As genres they are essentially defined by their namesakes, as pretty much any monster taming game will be by pokemon, yet game releases in those genres have none of the accusations of copying which plagues pokemon. In some cases it has actually been the opposite, with games that deviate too far from the source material being criticized for (essentially) “false advertising.”
Re:
Which you would literally expect more of in Palworld’s case if there was this much confusion, as many people go into it with the false impression they are getting Pokemon, but end up playing an Ark clone.
Re: Re:
AFAIK, the developer and publisher aren’t the ones who came up with the “Pokemon but with guns” bit. So the customers can’t really criticize them for it. The marketing material is pretty clear that this is a survival & exploration game with creature collection and battle mechanics.
Could be a selling point for a game that it might run afoul of copyright laws.
The game is only available for a limited time, the creators could be sent to jail at any time, and sacrifices were made to bring this game to market. Treat it like you would a book written by a Russian dissident from the old Soviet Union
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Clearly ripped off
Come on everyone knows they ripped off Pokémon. How ever I do think they are in the clear even though it’s obviously a rip off.
Re:
That depends on your definition of “rip off”, especially since their focus is on a platform where the original is not available. A lot of successful properties are homages or closely related to existing ideas without being infringing.
Re:
Rip off isn’t a legal term. (Neither is plagiarism, for that matter.)
Re: Re:
Plagiarism isn’t a legal term, but rather a scholarly one for academic dishonesty involved in trying to pass one’s work off as one’s own, which can result in failing a class to expulsion from the campus as a whole.
Copyright infringement is the legal equivalent to the scholarly offense, applying to the general public the way plagiarism applies to students. Since writing term papers and essays requires at least some usage of previous material, learning bibliographic citation is necessary to survive in college.
Perhaps learning that same kind of bibliographic citation could prevent the same negative consequences for artists and musicians. Knowing that would take away the “other than college, when will I use this skill” that most students think about MLA and APA citations.
Lawsuits over Superman
Your example about DC comics suing other companies because of their characters’ likeness to Superman is actually incorrect.
In the 1950’s, DC sued Fawcett Comics saying Shazam was too similar to Superman. In the end, Fawcett ceased publication and the lawsuit didn’t go anywhere. Then years later, DC would but up Fawcett’s assets and add characters like Shazam (and Black Adam) to the DC universe.
Then in the 1980’s, DC sued ABC saying The Greatest American Hero was a rip-off of Superman. But the show ended due to low ratings before the lawsuit anywhere.
And the reason DC hasn’t sued over Homelander is because “The Boys” started its publication at DC!
Re:
Suing and going nowhere, or scaring your target does not a legal win make.
Re: Re:
Depends on the goal. SLAPP suit for example don’t have to win in court to be successful, if all a plaintiff is after is stopping the other person from doing something and the lawsuit, whether failed or not does that that certainly seems like a win to me.
Re:
“the lawsuit didn’t go anywhere.”
“the show ended due to low ratings before the lawsuit anywhere”
Those don’t seem to be the best examples of prior litigation…
The worry here, more than Japanese IP law, would be Japanese judges. That’s a closed culture that they tried to fix a little at least with murder and other major cases, but nowhere else.