The Pokémon Company International is taking Pokémon Pty Ltd to court over ads for a new NFT-based Pokémon mobile game, according to documents filed with the Federal Court of Australia. No Pokémon is going to court, but an Australian company called Pokémon Pte Ltd set up a website called Cotyota Studios that said it was going to launch a crypto game called Pokeworld.
Not only that, but he has said he worked on other Pokémon games, like Pokémon Scarlet and Violet, Pokémon Home, and even Pokémon Sleep, which was never released. In legal documents, The Pokémon Company International says that they are not a contractor for them.
The Pokémon Company International has asked the court to stop Pokémon Pvt Ltd from using its trademarks on its website and social media, putting out games, or selling any NFTs that use its IP.
TPCi’s attorney also specifically stated that “TPCi, The Pokémon Company and Nintendo had made a deliberate decision not to launch any Pokémon NFTs”.
Pokeworld website advertises a new game “Brought to you by The Pokémon Company International and Cotyota“. I understand that Cotyota Studios (Cotyota) is an entity related to Respondents in their business endeavor that is the subject of these proceedings. On that website, there is a section titled “2022-2023 ROADMAP” which outlines the timeline for the launch of Pokeworld. and outlines a timeline for the issuance of non-fungible tokens (NFTs) related to Pokémon characters. A review of that webpage indicates that the Pokeworld game will launch in January 2023.”
Kotiota Studios was courageous enough to reach out to media websites to increase interest in their game, which is how TPCI discovered about it. The initial petition was filed with the court on December 19, 2022, and the first hearing was place on December 21, 2022. The Pokémon Company International’s legal counsel appeared. None from Cotyota Studios did, however.
The Pokémon Firm International plainly owns the Pokémon rights, while the other company does not. At this point, Pokémon Pte Ltd must cease all operations, including advertising for the game. The court finds that TPCi has a strong case and requests additional information before imposing costs or damages. If they fail to reply, additional legal action may be taken.
Latest NFT News, Trendings and Tutorials, right at your inbox, every Monday Leave this field empty if you're human: