Skip to content
English
お問い合わせ

[Patent Attorney Commentary] A Patent Attorney Explains Nintendo’s *Splatoon* Game Patents—Invention Eligibility and Claim Strategy for Protecting “Inking”

Picture of 弁理士 杉浦健文

The appeal of *Splatoon* lies, above all, in the exhilarating feeling of competing to cover the ground with ink. However, it is not widely known that this very core mechanic of “painting”—the essence of the game—has actually been patented or is the subject of multiple patent applications.Nintendo is securing intellectual property rights for experiential values—such as the game’s “fun” and “feel of the controls”—not merely as presentation elements, but as technical inventions.

This article aims to provide business professionals with an understanding of the mechanism behind “how a game’s fun becomes intellectual property,” while offering patent attorneys and intellectual property practitioners concrete examples of “claim drafting and protection strategies for game mechanics.”With patents on game mechanics now gaining attention as practical enforcement tools—triggered by events such as the 2024 Palworld-related litigation—the Splatoon patent portfolio serves as an excellent case study. The following analysis is based solely on verified patents whose claims have been confirmed in the original text on Google Patents.

1. Introduction—Why “Games × Patents” Is Gaining Attention Now

As the gaming industry continues to expand, patents are increasingly being used as a means to deter similar games released by latecomers. This is because, while copyright law may struggle to address “looks different but works the same” copycat products, patents—which protect technical concepts—can serve as a deterrent.

A symbolic example is the patent lawsuit reportedly filed in 2024 by Nintendo and Pokémon against Pocket Pair (developer of “Palworld”). In this case, patents related to game mechanics were used as a means of enforcement, serving as a catalyst for raising widespread awareness that a game’s “mechanics” can be utilized in real-world enforcement.Please note that this article does not intend to determine the outcome of the lawsuit or the validity of individual patents; it merely cites this as an example of rights enforcement in practice.

A defining characteristic of Nintendo is that it treats experiential values such as “fun” and “feel” (the tactile sensation of gameplay) not merely as visual presentation, but as technical inventions, and secures them as patents. In this article, any references to patent numbers or content are limited to verified patents for which the claims have been confirmed in the original text on Google Patents.

2. What Are Game Patents? — The Basic Structure of Inventive Step and Patentability

Article 2, Paragraph 1 of the Japanese Patent Act defines an “invention” as “a highly advanced creation of a technical concept utilizing the laws of nature.”The key point here is that the “rules” or “methods of play” of a game are, in and of themselves, conventions established by humans (artificial agreements) that do not utilize the laws of nature; therefore, they do not constitute an invention on their own. The idea of “competing by painting territory with ink” alone is not patentable.

On the other hand, when that game is implemented using computer software, if the software works in conjunction with hardware resources (such as the CPU, memory, input devices, and display controls) to perform specific information processing, it is recognized as an “invention related to software” and thus qualifies as an invention.This is the requirement set forth in Chapter 1, “Computer Software-Related Inventions,” of Appendix B to the Patent and Utility Model Examination Guidelines: “information processing by software is concretely realized using hardware resources.”To put it simply, the question is whether a concrete processing flow—specifically, “what input is received, what calculations are performed, and how the results are displayed and evaluated”—has been established, rather than merely abstract rules.

It is no coincidence that the Splatoon patents are all structured across four categories: “information processing system,” “information processing program,” “information processing apparatus,” and “information processing method” (i.e., physical objects, programs, devices, and methods). This is a standard practice to ensure the invention meets the requirements for patentability while securing a broad scope of protection.This ensures that infringers with different implementation methods—such as program providers, device sellers, and service operators—can be covered by any of these categories.

The key to patenting UI and game progression controls is to avoid describing them in abstract terms such as “a game where you paint with ink.” Only by describing them as a technical process flow—such as “input → coloring the drawing area → determination based on the coloring state”—can they be established as an invention.Furthermore, it is standard practice in game patents to avoid including game titles or proper nouns such as “ink” or “weapon” in the claims, and instead to describe them using higher-level concepts and abstract terms such as “corresponding color,” “drawing area,” and “drawing event.”In fact, it is precisely this convention that creates the difficulty in searching—as will be discussed later—because “proper nouns cannot be searched by number.”

3. Explanation of Specific Patents

3-A. Core Patent: Patent No. 5980266 (Basic Invention of Turf War)

Corresponding Game Function: This is the core mechanic of “Territory Battle,” in which the player’s character paints the virtual space (ground and terrain) with ink of the character’s corresponding color, adjusts the character’s movement control based on the state of the painted area, and determines the outcome of the match based on factors such as the area painted.

Technical concept protected by the claims: Claim 1 is configured as an information processing system comprising means for controlling the player’s character based on user input; means for drawing (coloring) the corresponding color in a virtual space; means for controlling display andmovement control based on the state of the drawn area (whether it is within the player’s colored area or not), and means for determining the outcome of a match by comparing the drawing state with that of the opposing character’s different color. The key point is that it views the core of the “painting” experience as technical processes of coloring and state comparison.

Scope of Rights and Practical Considerations: The title is identical to those of 6283072, 6543361, and 6561155, which will be discussed later, and based on publicly available information, it can be interpreted as a divisional series stemming from a base application.Among these, Patent No. 5980266 can be interpreted as the parent application defining a relatively higher-level concept (verification of the application history is required to confirm the parent-child relationship within the divisional series). This is a good example illustrating that FTO searches must track the entire family and divisional series, rather than focusing on individual application numbers. (Source: Patent No. 5980266)

3-B. Patent No. 6283072 (Separate Controls for Movement and Drawing + Area-Based Win/Loss Determination)

Corresponding game functionality: A mechanism that controls movement and drawing (coloring) via separate input operations and determines the winner by comparing the colored areas.

Technical concept protected by the claims: Claim 1 explicitly distinguishes between a “first control input” for moving the player character and a “second control input (different from the first)” for performing drawing actions.Furthermore, it defines means for coloring with the corresponding color based on the second input, attacking enemy characters with a different corresponding color, and determining the winner based on the areas colored with both colors.

Scope of Protection and Practical Considerations: By clearly defining “movement input” and “drawing input” as separate inputs, the patent extends protection to encompass the design philosophy of the control system (e.g., moving with one hand and coloring with the other).Since these claims are more limited than those of the parent patent (No. 5980266), they are more narrowly targeted; the hierarchical design—overlapping general concepts with limited versions—is a key learning point. (Source: Patent No. 6283072)

3-C. Patent No. 6543361 (Behavioral Changes in the Player’s Color Area = Squid Movement and Hiding)

Corresponding game features: This mechanism changes the character’s display and movement controls depending on whether the character is within an ink area of its own color. Examples include high-speed movement within the player’s color area and reduced visibility due to assimilation into or concealment within the player’s ink.

Technical concept protected by the claims: Claim 1 stipulates that when the player character is within an area colored in its corresponding color, display control and/or movement control shall differ from when the character is in an uncolored area.It technically defines the very "feel" of the gameplay—where behavior changes depending on "where the character is (whether in its own color area or not)"—as a conditional branch.

Scope of Protection and Practical Considerations: A key feature is that it isolates behavior control—which generates “player feedback and tactical depth”—as an independent invention, rather than focusing on victory or defeat determination. This is a prime example of taking what appears at first glance to be a purely visual element and securing patent protection by describing it as a conditional branch: “comparison of the area’s color with the player’s color → switching of controls.”(Source: Patent No. 6543361)

3-D. Patent No. 6561155 (Camouflage, Movement Speed Differences, and Ink Synchronization in Online Multiplayer)

Corresponding game features: In addition to stealth (blending into ink to hide) and movement speed differences based on terrain color, this mechanism involves sending and receiving rendering information during online multiplayer matches to synchronize ink coverage status among multiple players.

Technical concept protected by the claims: Claim 1 (information processing program) involves a mechanism where, in addition to a first control input for movement anda second control input for drawing; furthermore, the communication means generates and transmits “player character rendering event data,” receives the opponent’s “enemy character rendering event data,” and, based on both, colors areas in the player’s and enemy’s colors.

Scope of Protection and Practical Considerations: A key practical point is that the scope of protection extends not only to single-player coloring but also to the network implementation of “synchronization and transmission of coloring states in online battles.”By focusing on the “transmission of drawing events” rather than the drawing itself, the intent appears to be to extend the scope of the rights down to the level of implementation architecture (although there may be disputes regarding the possibility of circumvention and the validity of the claims). (Source: Patent No. 6561155)

3-E. JP 2022-124256 (New Action “Squid Roll” in Splatoon 3)

Corresponding game feature: The new “Squid Roll” action in Splatoon 3. While moving in stealth mode, performing a jump plus directional input causes the character to bounce out of the ink while quickly changing direction.

Technical concept protected by the claims: While moving in stealth mode within a colored area, the claims define a control mechanism that causes the character to jump while rapidly changing direction—while maintaining speed—when a jump input and directional input are performed and the conditions “movement speed is at or above a predetermined speed” and “the angle of change in movement direction is at or above a predetermined angle” are met.The objective is to improve playability.

Scope of Rights and Practical Considerations: By defining each new action as a separate claim consisting of “threshold conditions for speed and angle plus control,” a strategy is evident to continuously build a network of related patents with each sequel.Please note that this application is currently at the publication (JP 2022-124256 A) stage—meaning the scope of rights is not yet finalized—and the final scope of rights should be confirmed through the examination process and the claims after registration. (Source: JP 2022-124256 A)

Practical Tips (Filing Timing): The filing date for “Ika Roll” and related applications was February 15, 2021—just three days before its first public reveal on Nintendo Direct (February 18, 2021).Complete the application before public disclosure to avoid loss of novelty due to your own disclosure. The precision of this timing is crucial for avoiding loss of novelty regarding the core features of a hit product and increasing the likelihood of obtaining a patent.

3-F. JP 2021-102066 (UI for Displaying Markers and Determining Position on a Map) *Included for reference

Corresponding game feature: This UI invention changes the display style of markers depending on whether parts of a map object are hidden or visible on the map screen, making it easier to grasp the vertical positional relationships. It is included as a reference not for the filling or movement functions themselves, but for its “position awareness” functionality.

Technical concept protected by the claims: A first image of a 3D virtual space is generated by a first virtual camera; marker objects are placed on map objects; and in a second image captured by a second virtual camera, the claims specify that, based on the map structure,"hidden parts" and "unhidden parts" in the second image captured by the second virtual camera.

Scope of Protection and Practical Considerations: The fact that this patent describes and characterizes a UI expression—which at first glance appears to be merely a “visual design choice”—as a technical process involving virtual cameras and display mode control serves as a useful reference model for UI patent practice.According to published information, this is a divisional application of Japanese Patent Application 2017-002093 (Japanese Patent Application Publication 2018-110659). This application is also in the publication stage, meaning its rights have not yet been established. (Source: Japanese Patent Application Publication 2021-102066)

3-G. Corresponding Foreign Patents: US9943758B2 / Viewpoint Control: US9132347B2

US9943758B2 is the U.S. counterpart patent (priority date: May 14, 2014) belonging to the same invention family as the 5980266 series.Claim 1 defines control of the player’s character based on input commands, application of the player’s color, battle determination based on the coloring status of enemy and player colors, and control based on a comparison between the color of the area where the player’s character is located and the player’s color.The specification also includes references to an “ink gun” and the statement that “shooting strength may be adjusted.” This reflects Nintendo’s approach to global patent protection, as it is expanding its core mechanics within the same patent family not only in Japan but also in the United States.

US9132347B2 describes technology that controls the orientation of a virtual camera (viewpoint and aiming direction) based on the orientation of a handheld device (gyro/accelerometer sensors). The specification states that the orientation of a second virtual camera is calculated to correspond to the orientation of the handheld device.However, this is less specific to Splatoon and more representative of the asymmetric cooperative play technology from the Wii U generation; it can be linked to the lineage of “moving the viewpoint with the gyro.” I should honestly note that the full verbatim text of Claim 1 has not been obtained, and the above is a summary based on the description and fragments of the claims.(Source: US9943758B2 / US9132347B2)

Practical Tips (Reservation of Validity): While filing core mechanics as a single patent family across multiple countries is a sound strategy, some recent U.S. game mechanics patents have faced criticism for being “too broad,” and there have been reports of partial invalidation.In practice, it is important not to overestimate the scope of your rights, assuming that the validity and scope of the patents you obtain may be contested.

4. Supplementary Note: Are Weapon Swaps, Specials, and Charges Patented? (Good-Faith Reservation)

Within the scope of this review, we were unable to identify any Nintendo patents that explicitly claimed “weapon switching,” “special weapon activation,” or “charging (charged shots)”—features that tend to attract reader interest—as central limitations in independent claims.While the specifications of the core patent group mentioned above do include descriptions such as “firing an ink gun” and “adjusting firing intensity,” we have not identified any independent claims that specifically limit these three themes by name.

Note: Elements such as the Special Gauge filling up as you cover areas with ink are game specifications (matters explained in strategy wikis, etc.) and are not part of the patent claims themselves. “Specifications” and “claims” are distinct concepts. Blurring this distinction carries the risk of basing discussions on rights that do not actually exist.

This caveat itself illustrates an important lesson in game patent research: namely, that “you cannot search using proper nouns” and that “specifications and claims are distinct.”For more reliable identification, it is necessary to conduct a comprehensive search on J-PlatPat and similar databases using the applicant (Nintendo Co., Ltd.) and abstract keywords (such as “gauge,” “accumulation,” or “switch”), as well as to conduct a detailed examination of the cited and divisional families of the core patent group.

5. Lessons for Practitioners—Claim Drafting, Patent Strategy, and Design-Around

Perspective Key Insights from the Splatoon Patents
Drafting Using the term “rule” in the claims carries the risk of being deemed non-inventive or insufficiently described. Be sure to describe the invention using high-level concepts such as corresponding colors, drawing areas, and drawing events, following the flow of “input → information processing → display/determination.”
Patent Strategy Secure the core mechanics in the base application, then file divisional and related applications for each sequel covering new actions, UI, and communication technologies to build a comprehensive network of peripheral patents.
Filing Timing Complete the application before public disclosure to avoid loss of novelty. The key is to establish a system that uncovers inventions—even those the developers themselves are unaware of—through reviews of development materials and hands-on testing of the actual device.
Design-Around Analyze the limiting elements of independent claims (e.g., treating movement and drawing as separate inputs; switching control based on whether an area is the user’s color; sending and receiving drawing events) and determine which limitations can be removed to avoid claim satisfaction.

A key point to note regarding design-around is that simply avoiding a single claim number is not sufficient.In cases like the Splatoon patents, where multiple scopes of protection are layered across an entire patent family or division series, even if you can remove a limitation from a specific independent claim, you may still infringe on a parent patent covering a broader concept or claims in a different category. It is necessary to map the entire series and evaluate the degree of freedom.

Practical Tips (FTO Search): Proprietary terms will not yield hits. It is most effective to combine abstract concept keywords (movement, drawing, judgment, input operations, virtual space, etc.), IPC/FI classifications (A63F13 series: video games), applicant name matching, and actual verification of cited and divisional families.

Note (Verifying Numbers and Types): The format differs between registered publications (JP…B2) and published applications (JP20XX-XXXXXXA [JP20XX-XXXXXXA]). At the published (JP20XX-XXXXXXA) stage, rights are not yet established; therefore, the scope of protection should be confirmed based on the registered claims following the examination process and amendments.Since secondary information numbers may contain errors or have expired, we recommend verifying bibliographic data, classification, and claims directly in the original documents on J-PlatPat or Google Patents.

6. Summary + Consultation

The experiential values of Splatoon—“ink coverage,” “squid movement and hiding,” and “ink synchronization in online multiplayer”—are comprehensively protected through a combination of claim drafting using abstract concepts and a division strategy.The core elements are covered by the foundational patent (Patent No. 5980266), and the patent protection network expands in layers to include area-based victory determination based on separate inputs (Patent No. 6283072), behavioral changes within one’s own-color area (Patent No. 6543361),synchronization in online play (Patent No. 6561155), and new actions introduced in the sequel (Japanese Patent Application Publication No. 2022-124256), creating a layered structure where the patent portfolio expands in layers.

This approach is not limited to games. Technical innovations that underpin the “fun” and “usability” of a company’s own services can also be patented as software-related inventions, depending on how they are described. The first step is to reframe these ideas—rather than leaving them as abstract concepts—as a technical process consisting of “input → information processing → display/determination.”

Consult with Evorix Intellectual Property Firm

At Evorix Intellectual Property Firm (evorix.jp), we offer consultations on software and game-related inventions, including patent applications, claim drafting, and FTO (freedom-to-operate) searches. Please feel free to contact us via the inquiry form to discuss how your company’s “entertainment value” and “usability” can be framed as technical inventions and considered for patent protection.

*This article is intended to provide general information and does not guarantee conclusions regarding specific cases. The patent information provided is based on publicly available information as of the time of writing. In particular, for cases at the publication (JP *) stage, rights are not yet finalized; please verify the actual scope of rights based on the examination process and the claims after registration.

Splatoon Patent Series (5-Part Series)