Video games : Design law evolves towards a simple logic
Design law is evolving towards a simple logic: Recognize the visual experience as the asset it already is.
A video game isn’t just a program.
It’s an interface, animations, a visual universe.
These are the elements that create :
- the game’s identity,
- recognition,
- and public attachment.
The Pokémon & Palworld case is a case in point
What initially aroused criticism was not a technical reproduction.
It was a visual and stylistic proximity.
- Similar creatures
- Very similar combat design (capture, throw, mount)
→ comparable overall impression
The reform now makes it possible to secure these elements, provided they are new and distinctive.
In concrete terms, this means :
- act against a visual copy even if the code is different even if the functionality changes
For this particular case, that’s unlikely to change much.
- The dispute is still pending before the Japanese courts.
- For future litigation, however, the impact will be real.
Public debate focused on visual similarities
- Japanese law responds with technical patents
- The European reform reduces this gap.