Can You Patent a Video Game? Yes, Video games are built from a mix of code, design, music, and mechanics. In the U.S., many of these parts are protected by copyrights or trademarks. But some parts, especially those that show technical innovation, may qualify for patents. A patent gives the owner the right to stop others from using, selling, or making the same invention for a certain period. This is important for developers who create new ways to interact with games or solve technical problems.
For example, Namco famously patented the idea of letting players interact with a mini-game during a loading screen. This patent kept other companies from using this feature in their own games until the patent expired. That’s how strong patent protection can be.
But not every game idea can be patented. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) only grants patents to inventions that are new, useful, and non-obvious. This includes game mechanics, software processes, or even hardware setups—if they meet these standards.
What Parts of a Video Game Can Be Patented?
In the U.S., a developer cannot patent an entire video game. However, they can patent specific features if those features offer a unique technical solution or a new way of doing something. The most common parts of a game that can be patented include:
- Software processes that handle data or user input in a new way
- Game mechanics that offer a new method of interaction or outcome
- Network features that handle multiplayer connections more efficiently
- User interface functions that solve technical display problems
For instance, Activision has received patents for methods that match players in multiplayer games to increase engagement. These types of patents do not cover the game’s visuals or story, but the underlying systems and logic.
Another example is when Sega patented a method of displaying information during character movements that helped players track attacks more easily. These are technical solutions, not just creative ideas, and they meet the requirements of U.S. patent law.
Why Game Mechanics Can Qualify for Patent Protection
Game mechanics are not usually protected by copyright, which guards original expressions like artwork, sound, or storyline. But if a mechanic introduces a new technical method or process, it may be patentable.
A common misunderstanding is that “ideas” can be patented. They cannot. The USPTO does not allow patents on abstract ideas. However, if a developer takes an idea and turns it into a working process—one that solves a problem in a new way—then it becomes patentable.
This is why it’s important to look at how a mechanic works behind the scenes. If it uses software code or hardware to achieve something new, then it might qualify.
That’s how companies like Nintendo and Sony protect their innovations. They don’t patent the “fun” part of a game, but the systems that make that experience possible.
How the Supreme Court Changed Software Patents
One key legal decision that changed the way software and game mechanics are viewed under patent law was Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International (2014). This case involved patents on financial software but had a wide effect across all industries using computer programs, including gaming.
The Supreme Court ruled that abstract ideas carried out by generic computers are not patentable unless they include an “inventive concept.” This means that software must do something more than just perform a known function with a computer. It must improve how computers work or solve a technical problem in a new way.
This ruling made it harder to get patents for certain types of software, including some game mechanics. Since then, developers must show that their inventions are not just logical steps or mathematical processes but are actual improvements to technology.
As a result, fewer broad patents are approved, and more focus is placed on how a specific process works within the game engine or system.
Examples of Patents in U.S. Gaming
Many well-known companies in the video game industry have successfully patented parts of their games in the U.S. Here are a few examples:
Namco patented the concept of mini-games during loading screens (U.S. Patent No. 5,718,632). This idea was widely used in titles like Ridge Racer, giving players something to do while waiting. The patent expired in 2015, opening the door for other developers to use the feature.
Electronic Arts (EA) filed patents related to dynamic difficulty adjustment, a system that changes the challenge level based on player performance. The goal is to keep players engaged longer, which directly ties into game monetization strategies.
Activision was granted a patent (U.S. Patent No. 9,789,406) for a matchmaking system that pairs less experienced players with more skilled ones who own in-game items. The system subtly encourages item purchases based on performance. This sparked debate about fairness but shows how companies protect business-driven features through patents.
These examples reflect how companies use patents to secure control over technical features, not just creative elements.
Difference Between Patents, Copyrights, and Trademarks
Video game developers often use more than one type of legal protection. Here’s a quick breakdown of how each works in the U.S.:
Patents protect new inventions that offer technical solutions. These last up to 20 years and must be approved through an application process.
Copyrights protect original works like scripts, characters, code, music, and artwork. These rights exist automatically when the work is created, though registration adds legal benefits.
Trademarks protect names, logos, and slogans that identify a product or company. For example, “The Legend of Zelda” and its logo are trademarked by Nintendo.
Each form of protection covers different parts of a game. A developer can hold all three types of protection for one game title if different elements meet the legal standards.
What Makes a Video Game Patent Worth It?
Getting a patent takes time and money. Filing a provisional application with the USPTO can cost between $70 and $300. A non-provisional application ranges from $900 to $2,000 in filing fees. Add legal costs, and the total can reach $10,000 or more.
The full process usually takes 1 to 3 years, depending on how complex the patent is and how quickly the USPTO reviews it.
Because of the cost, game developers should ask a few questions before applying:
- Is the feature technically new?
- Does it solve a real problem or improve how games work?
- Will this feature be used in many future titles?
- Could competitors easily copy it?
If the answer is yes to most of these, then a patent might be a smart move. But if the feature is likely to be outdated soon or too broad to get approval, then it may not be worth the time and expense.
Also, if developers choose not to file a patent, they must be careful about keeping their innovations a secret until release. Public use or disclosure before applying can block patent approval in the U.S.
Why Developers Should Avoid Public Disclosure
U.S. patent law allows a one-year grace period for public disclosures before filing. But this is risky. If a developer shows a new feature at a trade show, in a YouTube video, or during a beta test, that starts the countdown.
After one year, the developer loses the right to patent that idea. Worse, if a competitor sees the idea and files first, they might get the patent, not the original creator.
That’s why many large studios keep certain features under wraps or use non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) with testers and contractors. Smaller developers should also take these steps if they believe they have a feature worth protecting.
Using a provisional patent can help. This is a lower-cost, temporary application that holds the invention’s place in line while the developer decides whether to file the full patent later.
Is a Patent Right for Your Game?
In the U.S., video game patents can offer strong protection for unique mechanics and systems—but only if they meet strict legal standards. Developers must show that their idea does something new in a technical way. A fun or creative concept alone isn’t enough.
With growing competition and the rise of copycat games, some studios use patents as part of their strategy to stand out or secure long-term profits. Others rely more on copyright and trademark law. For any developer thinking about patents, it’s wise to talk to a qualified attorney before filing. A lawyer can help decide if the feature meets the legal rules and whether a patent is the best way to protect it.
While not every game needs a patent, those that solve real problems or include new types of interaction may benefit from this extra layer of legal control. Not sure if your video game qualifies for a patent? Contact Stevens Law Group today for a consultation and get expert legal guidance tailored to your game.
References:
USPTO.Gov – Patent Basics
Lexology – Patents in the gaming industry: how and why?
UpCounsel – Understanding Video Game Patents and Their Legal Impact
Leave a Reply