Games

38467 readers

2462 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

Submissions have to be related to games
No bigotry or harassment, be civil
No excessive self-promotion
Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
Mark Spoilers and NSFW
No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here and here.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

950

Palworld confirms ‘disappointing’ game changes forced by Pokémon lawsuit (www.videogameschronicle.com)

submitted 3 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

253 comments fedilink hide all child comments

With the implementation of Patch v0.5.5 this week, we must make yet another compromise. From this patch onward, gliding will be performed using a glider rather than with Pals. Pals in the player’s team will still provide passive buffs to gliding, but players will now need to have a glider in their inventory in order to glide.

How lame. Japan needs to fix its patent laws, it's ridiculous Nintendo owns the simple concept of using an animal to fly.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 1 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

underpaid graduate and PhD students

They usually get grants, and frequently the student will get hired to follow up on that research. A lot of the research ends up unusable to the company as well, at least on its own.

majority of costs are publicly subsidized

I think that's a bit extreme, but I'll give you that a lot of R&D is subsidized. The COVID example, however, is an outlier, since the funding was to accelerate ending the pandemic, which was critical for the economy as a whole.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

the student will get hired to follow up on that research.

You're right that that's an aspect I forgot about, however If the patent system worked as you envision it then those students would own the parent which they would then lease to those companies. The actual situation is quite legally messy because it's usually the universities which own the IP produced, (which is then leased out via partnerships, grants etc ) and when those individuals lease themselves with the promise of producing more valuable IP they have to take cautions to not infringe on their previous work.

I think that's a bit extreme,

Not really, using Covid as an example this paper details the pre and post-epidemic funding sources that went into the discovery, testing and production of the COVID vaccine. Do you have any other examples you'd like to use to demonstrate how it's "extreme"?

The COVID example, however, is an outlier

Yes and no, but it is well publicized and documented which is what I was trying to communicate with that specific one as an example.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

it’s usually the universities which own the IP produced

Which is totally reasonable. The student applies for a graduate program to get a degree, not get rich off a patent. Theoretically, any patent royalties retained by the university would go toward funding university activities. I don't know how much this happens in practice though.

That said, there should be limits here. If a patent makes over a certain amount, the rest should go to the student.

it is well publicized and documented

Right, because it's an outlier.

If you go to the patent office and look at recent patents, I doubt a significant number are the result of government funding. Most patents are mundane and created as part of private work to prevent competitors from profiting from their work. My company holds a ton of patents, and I highly doubt the government has any involvement in funding them.

Did Nintendo get government funding for its patents? I doubt it.