.png?width=500&height=250&name=%E7%9F%A5%E7%9A%84%E8%B2%A1%E7%94%A3%E4%BA%8B%E5%8B%99%E6%89%80%E3%82%A8%E3%83%9C%E3%83%AA%E3%82%AF%E3%82%B9%20(500%20%C3%97%20250%20px).png)
Swimming effortlessly like a squid on your own ink and diving into it to deceive enemies—Patent No....
Analyzing Patent No. 6561155 for “Ink Synchronization in Online Multiplayer” in Splatoon Based on Its Claims [Explanation by a Patent Attorney]
In *Splatoon*’s Turf War mode, online battles are the main arena. Patent No. 6561155 directly covers the network implementation of “ink synchronization”—the process of ensuring that the state of the ink being spread by eight players is consistently displayed in real time on everyone’s screen.As the fourth installment in our Splatoon patent series, this article analyzes this patent in detail, including a direct quote from Claim 1.A key point to note is that the claims cover the transmission and reception of “rendering event data” (the act of inking) rather than pixels (the result of inking). By looking beyond the game’s visual appearance and framing the invention at the level of the communication architecture, these are the most “implementation-oriented” claims in the series.
Table of Contents
- What Is Patent No. 6561155?—Bibliographic Information and “Sibling Divisions Filed on the Same Day”
- Original Text of Claim 1 (Excerpt)
- Analysis of the Claim Elements—Reading Through the Communication Flow
- Why “Drawing Event Data”?—Technical Background
- Comparison with Parent and Sister Claims—The Big Picture of the Family
- Lessons for Practitioners—Implementation-Level Claims and Design-Around Strategies
- Summary + Consultation
1. What Is Patent No. 6561155? — Bibliographic Information and “Sibling Divisions Filed on the Same Day”
First, let’s verify the basic information of the subject patent using primary sources (the original text on Google Patents).
| Title of the Invention | Information Processing System, Information Processing Program, Information Processing Apparatus, and Information Processing Method |
| Patentee (Applicant) | Nintendo Co., Ltd. |
| Division Application Date | January 25, 2018 |
| Original Application (Direct Parent Application) | Patent Application No. 2016-145245 (= Patent No. 6283072). Furthermore, the parent application for that application is Patent Application No. 2014-100714 (= Patent No. 5980266, filing date May 14, 2014). |
| Registration Date | August 14, 2019 |
| Registration Number | Patent No. 6561155 (JP6561155B2) |
| Claim Category | Claim 1 is an “information processing program” |
What’s worth noting is the filing date. It was filed as a divisional application from the same application No. 2016-145245 on January 25, 2018—the same date as Patent No. 6543361 (Squid Movement and Hiding),
which we covered previously.In other words, these two patents are grand-divisional applications born on the same day
; one covers “Behavior Control in One’s Own Color Region,” while the other covers the subject matter of this patent, “Paint Synchronization in Online Multiplayer Games.” This indicates that the inventors expanded their patent portfolio simultaneously by targeting different layers of observation.
Japanese Patent Application No. 2014-100714 (Patent No. 5980266)
└─ Division → Japanese Patent Application No. 2016-145245 (Patent No. 6283072)
├─ Re-division (January 25, 2018) → Patent No. 6543361
(Behavior Control)
└─ Re-division (January 25, 2018) → This Case: Patent No. 6561155
(Communication Synchronization)
2. Original Text of Claim 1 (Excerpt)
Claim 1, which defines the scope of protection, is quoted here verbatim. Although this is the longest claim in the series, it will be broken down in later chapters in accordance with the flow of communication.
Patent No. 6561155 Claims Claim 1 (Original Text Citation)
“An information processing system comprising: means for accepting a first user operation input for moving a user character,and a second operation input from the user, different from said first operation input, for causing said player character to perform a drawing action; wherein the information processing system moves said player character within a virtual space based on said first operation input received by said operation input reception means, andand, based on the second control input received by said control input reception means, causes the player character within the virtual space to perform rendering actions, thereby coloring the rendering area of said virtual space with the corresponding color of said player character and causing the player character to attack enemy characters, functioning as game progression means;the information processing system further comprises communication means, and the game progression means generates player character rendering event data indicating a rendering event for coloring the rendering area of the virtual space with the corresponding color of the player character based on the second control input received by the control input reception means,said communication means transmits the player character rendering event data to the opposing user’s information processing system and receives enemy character rendering event data—generated based on the opposing user’s operation input—that indicates a rendering event for coloring the rendering area of the virtual space with the corresponding color of the enemy character,the game progression means is an information processing program that, based on the player character rendering event data and the enemy character rendering event data, colors the rendering area of the virtual space with the corresponding colors of the player character and the enemy character.”
3. Analysis of the Claim Elements—Reading in the Context of the Communication Flow
Although this is a long passage, the structure becomes clear when read in accordance with a single cycle of online multiplayer gameplay. It can generally be broken down into the following sections A through E.
| Claim Elements | Corresponding Portion of Claim 1 (Abstract) |
|---|---|
| A (Receipt of Separate Inputs) | Comprising operation input receiving means for receiving a first operation input for movement and a second operation input for drawing, which is different from the first. |
| B (Movement + Drawing + Attack) | It functions as game progression means that moves the player character using the first input, performs a drawing action using the second input to color the drawing area with the corresponding color, and causes the player character to attack enemy characters. |
| C (Event Generation) | The game progression means generates “player character drawing event data,” which indicates a drawing event for coloring, based on the second input. |
| D (Transmission + Reception) | The communication mechanism transmits the player character drawing event data to the other user’s information processing system and receives the “enemy character drawing event data” generated on the other side. |
| E (Reproduction Using Both Data Sets) | The game progression mechanism colors the rendering area in the virtual space using the player’s and enemy’s respective colors, based on both the player’s and enemy’s rendering event data. |
The phrase at the end is “information processing program that colors.” In short, the claim directly describes a symmetrical event exchange architecture in which “one’s own coloring is sent to the other party as an event, the other party’s coloring is received as an event, and the coloring state is reproduced on each player’s screen based on both sets of events.”
4. Why “Rendering Event Data”?—Technical Background
In theory, there are multiple ways to synchronize “painting” in online games.One method is to send the painted results (texture or pixel states) as-is; another is to periodically distribute the entire state of the stage; and a third, as in this case, is to send only events indicating “where, by whom, and what kind of painting occurred,” with the receiving side reconstructing the results independently.
If the results of the inking were sent as-is, the data volume for the inking state across the entire stage would become enormous, making it impractical for the bandwidth available in real-time multiplayer games. With a method that sends only events and has each device recalculate the results, the data volume is limited to being proportional only to the number of “events.”This is, in essence, the foundational design decision that makes it possible to run a game where eight players simultaneously splatter ink over a home internet connection; Claim 1 explicitly articulates this “event transmission + recreation on each device” method as elements C, D, and E.
Practical Tip (Uncovering “Invisible Inventions”): What players see is the painted stage, not the rendering event data. This patent demonstrates that inventions exist even in the layers of communication and data structures that do not appear on the screen.When uncovering inventions, asking engineers “Why does this experience work over the internet?” and “How were synchronization, latency, and bandwidth issues resolved?” can help identify potential patent applications hidden behind the UI.
5. Comparison with Parent and Sister Claims—The Big Picture of the Family
When we line up the four cases covered in this series, we can see that claims covering different layers have been extracted from the same original application (May 14, 2014).
| Patent Number | Positioning | Focus of the Claims |
|---|---|---|
| No. 5980266 | Parent (Core) | Drawing + Match Determination Based on Drawing Status + Differences in Behavior Within One’s Own Color Area (Core of Game Rules) |
| Patent No. 6283072 | Child (Subdivision) | Separate inputs for movement and drawing + attacks + victory/defeat determination based on painted area (control system and battle system) |
| No. 6543361 | Grandchild (Split on the Same Day; Senior Application) | Limited to behavior control within the user’s colored area only (broad claims excluding match determination) |
| Patent No. 6561155 (This Case) | Grandchild (same-day division; younger brother) | Generation, transmission, reception, and reproduction of drawing event data (communication architecture layer) |
What is interesting is that in this case, neither the “differences in behavior within one’s own-color area” nor the “match determination based on drawing status”—both of which were present in the parent patent—are included in the claims.Since the sibling patent No. 6543361 covers “differences in behavior” and the child patent No. 6283072 covers “win-loss determination,” this patent can focus exclusively on the communication synchronization layer—the division of roles is established across the entire patent family.This structure vertically slices a single gaming experience into the game rules layer, control system layer, behavior control layer, and communication layer, and assigns rights to each layer.
6. Lessons for Practitioners—Claims on the Implementation Layer and Design-Around Strategies
Strengths and Scope of Implementation-Level Claims
Even if the visual appearance of a “painting game” is altered, if the goal is to synchronize painting in real time online, the event transmission method remains a technically viable option. In other words, this claim is difficult to circumvent through mere visual design changes and forces a decision at the architectural design stage.By overlapping the game rule layer claim (parent) with the implementation layer claim (this case), the patent covers both the path of “circumvention by changing the rules” and the path of “circumvention by changing the implementation.”
Perspective on Design-Around (General Principles)
・From a literal interpretation, if a synchronization method does not include the configuration (C・D) of sending and receiving “rendering event data”—for example, a configuration where the server centrally manages the painting state and distributes only snapshots of that state to the client—there is room to dispute whether the claim is satisfied.However, depending on the interpretation of “data indicating events,” such a configuration could fall within the scope of the claim; therefore, careful consideration based on the specification and application history is necessary.
・Furthermore, this case specifies peer-to-peer exchange, defined as “transmission to the other user’s information processing system.” Whether relaying via a server is included in this wording is a matter of interpretation; given the potential applicability of the doctrine of equivalents, one cannot be complacent about relying on simple configuration changes. As always, evaluation across the entire family of patents—including parent and sibling patents—is essential.
Implications for Drafting
A key lesson from this case is the technique of naming data structures and incorporating them as elements of the claims. The terms “player character rendering event data” and “enemy character rendering event data” are concepts defined specifically for these claims, enabling the tracking of the sequence: generation (C) → transmission/reception (D) → utilization (E).In inventions related to communication and distributed processing systems, defining “what is being transmitted” as data and incorporating its lifecycle into the claim elements results in clear and easily provable claims. This is because, when proving infringement, it is relatively easy to objectively determine whether packets or API specifications contain elements corresponding to this data structure.
7. Summary + Consultation
Patent No. 6561155 covers the online synchronization of “Territory Battles” itself through the following sequence: “movement, drawing, and attacks via separate inputs (A, B) → generation of drawing event data (C) → transmission and reception with the opponent’s system (D) → reproduction of the coloring using both sets of data (E).”While the sibling patent No. 6543361, filed on the same day, covers the “feel” layer, this patent covers the “communication” layer; together with the parent and child patents, a single gaming experience is vertically protected—this can be considered the final piece of the division strategy we have observed throughout the Splatoon patent portfolio.
Consult with the Intellectual Property Firm Evorix
At Evorix Intellectual Property Law Firm (evorix.jp), we offer consultations regarding the filing of software and game-related inventions, claim drafting (including communication and data structures), and FTO (freedom-to-operate) searches. Please feel free to contact us via the inquiry form to discuss how to characterize implementation techniques not visible on-screen as inventions and explore patent protection options.
*This article is intended to provide general information and does not guarantee conclusions regarding specific cases or the validity of patents or the existence of infringement. The cited claims and bibliographic information are based on publicly available information (patent gazettes and Google Patents) as of the time of writing.Please base your interpretation of the actual scope of protection on the entire specification and the application history.
Splatoon Patent Series (5-part series)
- [Overview] A Patent Attorney Explains Nintendo’s Splatoon Game Patents—Inventive Step and Claim Strategy
- [Part 1] Core Patent: Patent No. 5980266—Deciphering the Fundamental Inventions of Turf War from the Claims
- [Part 2] Divisional Patent No. 6283072—Separate Inputs for Movement and Drawing; Victory Determination Based on Inked Area
- [Part 3] Patent No. 6543361—Claims That Protect “Squid Movement and Hiding” by Excluding Match Determination
- [Part 4] Patent No. 6561155 — Implementation-Level Claims Protecting “Ink Synchronization” in Online Multiplayer (This Article)
- [Related] A Patent Attorney Explains the Nintendo/Pokémon vs. Pocket Pair “Palworld” Patent Litigation
- [Compilation] Learning “Division Application” Strategies from Game Companies—Practical Insights from Two Case Studies
