Palworld Modder Changes ‘Pokémon’ Mod To Include Generic Characters Instead
from the that'll-surely-do-it dept
Well, this is certainly moving fast. We had begun talking about the recently released PC game Palworld as a great example of the idea/expression dichotomy in copyright law, specifically as the game has both been described as “Pokémon, but with guns” while also not containing any specific Pokémon copyrighted expression within it. While the Pokémon people had begun making some noises about wanting to look into whether the game does infringe any of its copyrights anyway, modder ToastedShoes released a mod for the game that almost seemed perfectly designed to illustrate the point I was making. His mod specifically injected actual Pokémon characters and assets into the game. Nintendo promptly took down a video preview of the mod via a DMCA notice as a result.
And sometimes that’s where these stories end. Other times, such as in this case, the modder decides to make some changes after the complaint that are specifically designed to give the rightsholder something of a middle finger. It seems that ToastedShoes has gone back and redesigned the mod such that it now includes mostly generic placeholder characters once more, rather than specific Pokémon expressions, with one notable exception.
He explains in a video that “we were planning on releasing [the mod] for free on Nexus”, which clearly isn’t possible anymore. The intended video went up on YouTube, but before it could even hit 100,000 views it was taken down. Not one to be stopped, Toasted Shoes’ team of modders has instead devised an infernal concoction of bootleg Pokémon, straight from the pits of Hades.
Using a mod that is “not a reference to anything, I promise,” the YouTuber plays through the adventures of “teenage boy in cap” as searches far and wide, catching legally distinct creatures. This ‘loveable’ cast of characters includes Yellow Rat, Braided Sheep, Fire Fox, and everybody’s favourite—Fat Cock.
You can see from the video embedded below that the changes made somehow both create characters that are fairly distinct from actual Pokémon characters while also retaining the clear impression that ToastedShoes’ mod is inspired, in some cases quite sarcastically, from those same characters.
Will any of this keep the Pokémon people at bay? I doubt it, given their reputation as jealous protectors of both their IP rights and the rights they sometimes imagine they have. But at the end of the day we are back to the idea/expression dichotomy. “Teenage boy in cap” is an idea, while Ash Ketchum is expression. The character in this game is not Ash Ketchum, no matter the inspiration for the character to begin with.
As for that one notable exception? It has nothing to do with Pokémon, but could land this into DMCA territory with an entirely different player, I suppose.
Teenage boy in cap’s ordeals culminate in a climactic battle with Saul Goodman, who conjures a giant cease & desist letter out of a small mason jar. It’s a reskin of the game’s Syndicate Tower battle with Rayne, who rides astride an
ElectabuzzGrizzbolt. I mean Grizzbolt. Don’t hurt me, Saul, I have a family.
Points for humor and creativity, to be sure, but we’ll see just how this all shakes out with the Pokémon people, AMC, and whoever else wants to take IP potshots at this game.
But if all of this does nothing else, I at least appreciate the way it illuminates just how far from copyright infringement the original game, Palworld, actually is.
Filed Under: copyright, dmca, mods, palworld, pokemon, video games
Companies: nintendo, pocketpair


Comments on “Palworld Modder Changes ‘Pokémon’ Mod To Include Generic Characters Instead”
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Why do you find it appealing when people skirt the Constitution when it comes to patents and copyrights? TechDirt always complains when law enforcement skirts search warrant requirements, when the government tries to block protests and lawn signs, and stuff like that. But somehow, a right given directly in the Constitution, not even an amendment, gets your disdain.
Re:
Copyright enforcement tends not to lead to the deaths of people involved, unlike when the cops start screaming “I feared for my life”. You know… like in Uvalde.
Re:
The ‘right’ that’s explicitly worded as being to serve the public?
The one that’s become so twisted and warped that it’s regularly used to silence and quash legal speech because the law is hilariously one-sided?
The one that utterly flips ‘innocent until proven guilty’ on it’s head because of the aforementioned one-sided nature of the law that leads to accusations of guilt being treated as legal findings of guilt unless the recipient is willing and able to fight back?
That ‘right’? Yeah, can’t imagine why people would cheer on those that ‘skirt around the Constitution'(strange way to spell ‘follow the law’ by the way) when it comes to that one.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re:
You sound like a communist.
Re: Re: Re:
ok revenge porn lover
Re: Re: Re:
It’s not communism to expect that the things you purchase can’t suddenly be called illegal because another content creator thinks they didn’t make enough money from their work.
Re: Re: Re:2
It IS very Communism for the government to restrict non violent, non obscene, non pornographic speech, under threat of arrest or unplayable fines. The same Constitution that gave Congress the ability to enforce for”limited times” a monopoly “for the progress of arts and sciences”, also interdicted “excessive fines and bails”, and that there would be “no law abridging the freedom of speech.”
And even if such speech was illegal, we have all of human history to show that censorship doesn’t work.
Re: Re: Re:3
No, honey, that’s fascism. You’re thinking of fascism.
Re: Re: Re:4
If that be true, then copyright is the tool of fascists, and is purely evil.
And in spite of all that, we won’t lose anything because of the sacrifice of money and freedom that many people made to give us the information we appreciate. And appreciating something that cost someone their freedom is something we should all do
Re: Re: Re:5
Well, you’re not wrong.
Re:
Because skirting copyright law like this usually benefits the public.
Law enforcement skirting the law usually harms the public.
Not to mention that modern copyright law is so far removed from what the original intent was that it’s outright tragicomic.
Re:
You mean “copyright”… yeah the constitution does not directly give that “right” to anyone. It allows (with limits) congress to create and govern copyright if congress so chooses. Congress could have abstained, and then the US would have had no copyright related laws at all.
Re: Re:
To further elaborate: The “rights” in the constitutional amendments are explicit limitations on government power. While the copyright clause is and explicit expansion of government power. In fact it allows the government to take away from people something they would otherwise have, but contingent on the public gaining something in return. So in a sense it is the antithesis of a “right”.
Re: Re: Re:
Correct. Copyright is a monopoly given to an individual or corporation that acts as a general prohibition on everyone else. That’s not to say that copyright has no place in the modern world, but life+70/95 years after creation is far too long.
Re: Re: Re:2
For software specifically I think somewhere around 5-14 years is reasonable. Especially since software is quickly out dated, found to be buggy and or vulnerable. Which means there is MORE naturally occurring incentive to write more or update it. And if there is more naturally occurring incentive, the artificial incentive is not needed as much
Re:
Do you know what Amendments do? Override the previous text of the Constitution. What you call “skirting” copyright is First Amendment free expression.
Re:
See, you misunderstand.
The US Constitution doesn’t guarantee that there must be copyrights and patents, but that Congress has the abilities to make those laws. If congress abolished copyright law and patents, that would also comply with the US constitution (but it would go against all the IP treaties we signed, so maybe not).
Re:
You obviously do not understand culture, where imitating and building on previous works is what constitutes a genre. Also memes taken from works in circulation become part of everyday expression. How often do you select films similar to other films you enjoy, and when you do do you consider how much has been copied, or do you just enjoy the story telling of the producer?
Re:
“TechDirt always complains when law enforcement skirts search warrant requirements…”
Don’t blame Techdirt for that, blame the mainstream media for overlooking such obvious violations of the Fourth Amendment.
Make the main character constantly yell Shootachu!
Make the mod a parody
LadySquirtle…..bit R rated
Chair Mander
Peak Hat Hugh
Bulbous Sores