@dual_sport_dork
@lemmy.worldThis comes full circle with everyone's grandma incessantly calling every piece of software on their computer "The Microsoft."
I believe the article intended was this one:
That's still not what the headline says, but sidebar rules notwithstanding I like OP's description better. This absolutely fits the definition of "mass shooting" that is used when it's not the police doing the shooting.
"Method for releasing 927 iterations of the same stale game across multiple platform generations."
It can't possibly be for "Method of splitting one complete game into two mutually exclusive cartridges with separate rosters to entice whales to buy two copies," because if it were they'd have already sued Capcom 15 years ago.
Pokemon: The innovative RPG where you couldn't even walk diagonally until generation 6...
It is not about model rips. Check your inbox to my other reply to another of your comments.
Arenβt they suing because of the 3d models??
No, they're not. The word "patent" is used in every single article about this repeatedly. Patents are not the same as copyrights.
A copyright protects a creative work: A work of fiction, a movie, a character.
A patent protects the method in which the way a thing functions: A machine, a chip, an algorithm, or in Nintendo's assertion certain vague gameplay concepts.
Yeah, you did not read any of the articles about this or understand the suit.
Nintendo is putting this forth as a patent issue, not a copyright issue. I presume this is because even they are smart enough to realize that they would probably lose a copyright challenge. However, the patents they are attempting to claim are clearly bullshit. They're just doing this as a bludgeon to bully a company they don't like, most likely in the hopes that the sheer cost of litigation will break them.
If they were going to propose that some of the monster models from Palworld originated as Pokemon model rips, they could arguably have a leg to stand on. But that's not what they're saying. The outcome of this case is not going to have any impact on copyright issues. Rather, the potential result is much more dangerous -- it would confirm that a big company can just come in late and retroactively lay claim to large swathes of mechanical concepts that have already widely in use in a particular industry for decades.
The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
IDGAF about Palworld as a game, personally. I've never played it and I don't plan to. But that doesn't make Nintendo's behavior not bullshit, and I still hope the Palworld developers win this battle.
I would personally take the ZX6R. I'm actually surprised at how little weight difference there is between the two, but either one should be fast enough for any purpose, both will have very race oriented ergonomics that will make them terrible for long distance trips so if you're already committed to that there's nothing to be gained or lost there. The ZX6R has a noticeably shorter wheelbase and should be more nimble at low speeds, e.g. commuting.
But at a $5896 price difference between the two, you could use the change left over from buying the Kawasaki versus the Beemer to buy another entire bike. Or failing that, a lot of oil, tires, fuel, chains, jackets, and helmets.
That, and I do not relish the thought of having to wrench on a modern BMW anything. That's just me.