Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Pokémon Go: Is a New Meaning to "Trespassing" in the Works?
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Date: April 6, 2017
Key Contacts
Back
Location-based augmented reality game Pokémon Go may have passed its prime, but that doesn’t mean bystanders have forgotten about the players stepping on their property. Legal action has been taken, and now a judge has to make a decision that may bring new substance to the meaning of trespassing, according to The Hollywood Reporter.
The evolution of Pokémon games
For those who are unaware, Pokémon Go is a play on the Game Boy Pokémon games that surfaced in the 90’s, according to Forbes contributor Dave Thier. The object of the original game is to capture Pokémon – a name derived from the combination of “pocket” and “monsters” – and train them to battle. The player sets out on a journey to capture and train as many Pokémon as possible, in hopes of becoming the best trainer in the world.
Fast forward to 2016: We’re in the digital age, where technological advances are spearheading so many different industries. Entertainment-wise, virtual reality has taken off, giving consumers an exciting, interactive way to play video games. Augmented reality has also surfaced, which is technology that takes a computer-generated image and superimposes it over the view of the real world via smartphone. Pokémon Go is the perfect example of such technology that has skyrocketed in popularity. Users play the game as they did in the 90s, but they’re not controlling the trainer within the game – they are the trainer outside of it. Using a smartphone camera, players find and catch virtual Pokémon characters in real-life locations.
Harmless play or a potential lawsuit?
While the game may have a great reputation with its players, that’s not quite the case for innocent bystanders. Last summer, many homeowners began nuisance lawsuits against the app’s developing company Niantic, claiming that strangers, walking around in what seemed like an aimless manner, were disturbing them on their property.
However, Niantic has stressed that unless these strangers are trespassing on the property – not merely aiming their phone at it to collect a virtual Pokémon – then there’s nothing to dispute. He stressed that all users must agree to Terms and Trainer Guidelines before playing the game, which states that they cannot break a law to capture a Pokémon.
But homeowners are firing back, hoping for an adjustment to the meaning of trespassing – one that denies “virtual trespassing” as well. A statement regarding the proposition can be found in the opposition brief:
“Landowners should have a right to refuse the placement of virtual objects on their property – at least where those virtual objects create any kind of incentive for any persons to be in their physical proximity.”
Niantic responds
But Niantic isn’t standing for this. His reply echoed his earlier argument – that a person may not be punished for “virtual trespass” – if so, this will destroy many apps that consumers love and use on a daily basis. In a reply to the opposition, Niantic’s lawyers stated the following:
“This does not support Plaintiffs’ theory that property owners should be able to prevent app developers from displaying on-screen virtual objects on the devices of third parties, at virtual locations corresponding to being near the property owners’ properties. If accepted, it would threaten numerous online services. For instance, creators of apps that display on-screen markers (e.g., a walking tour app that flags landmarks or an app that permits users to ‘check-in’ virtually to a location to connect with friends) could be liable for trespass. There is no legal support for, and no need for, the expansion of the law Plaintiffs advocate, so the Court should reject their theory.”
Most social media apps, for example, give users the ability to “check-in” at a location. Snapchat uses on-screen markers to tag geographical locations in pictures as well. If the courts redefine the meaning of trespassing, with a virtual twist, apps may suffer after eliminating interactive features that attract users.
- Industries: Entertainment & Media
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Related Posts
See all
Does Your Homeowners Insurance Provide Adequate Coverage?
Your home is likely your greatest asset, which is why it is so important to adequately protect it. Homeowners insurance protects you from the financial costs of unforeseen losses, such as theft, fire, and natural disasters, by helping you rebuild and replace possessions that were lost While the definition of “adequate” coverage depends upon a […]
Author: Jesse M. Dimitro
Understanding the Importance of a Non-Contingent Offer
Making a non-contingent offer can dramatically increase your chances of securing a real estate transaction, particularly in competitive markets like New York City. However, buyers should understand that waiving contingencies, including those related to financing, or appraisals, also comes with significant risks. Determining your best strategy requires careful analysis of the property, the market, and […]
Author: Jesse M. Dimitro
Fred D. Zemel Appointed Chair of Strategic Planning at Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC
Business Transactional Attorney Zemel to Spearhead Strategic Initiatives for Continued Growth and Innovation Little Falls, NJ – February 21, 2025 – Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC is pleased to announce that Partner Fred D. Zemel has been named Chair of the firm’s Strategic Planning Committee. In this role, Mr. Zemel will lead the committee in identifying, […]
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Novation Agreement Process: Step-by-Step Guide for Businesses
Big changes sometimes occur during the life cycle of a contract. Cancelling a contract outright can be bad for your reputation and your bottom line. Businesses need to know how to best address a change in circumstances, while also protecting their legal rights. One option is to transfer the “benefits and the burdens” of a […]
Author: Dan Brecher
What Is a Trade Secret? Key Elements and Legal Protections Explained
What is a trade secret and why you you protect them? Technology has made trade secret theft even easier and more prevalent. In fact, businesses lose billions of dollars every year due to trade secret theft committed by employees, competitors, and even foreign governments. But what is a trade secret? And how do you protect […]
Author: Ronald S. Bienstock
What Is Title Insurance? Safeguarding Against Title Defects
If you are considering the purchase of a property, you may wonder — what is title insurance, do I need it, and why do I need it? Even seasoned property owners may question if the added expense and extra paperwork is really necessary, especially considering that people and entities insured by title insurance make fewer […]
Author: Patrick T. Conlon
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Sign up to get the latest from our attorneys!
Explore What Matters Most to You.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Pokémon Go: Is a New Meaning to "Trespassing" in the Works?
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Location-based augmented reality game Pokémon Go may have passed its prime, but that doesn’t mean bystanders have forgotten about the players stepping on their property. Legal action has been taken, and now a judge has to make a decision that may bring new substance to the meaning of trespassing, according to The Hollywood Reporter.
The evolution of Pokémon games
For those who are unaware, Pokémon Go is a play on the Game Boy Pokémon games that surfaced in the 90’s, according to Forbes contributor Dave Thier. The object of the original game is to capture Pokémon – a name derived from the combination of “pocket” and “monsters” – and train them to battle. The player sets out on a journey to capture and train as many Pokémon as possible, in hopes of becoming the best trainer in the world.
Fast forward to 2016: We’re in the digital age, where technological advances are spearheading so many different industries. Entertainment-wise, virtual reality has taken off, giving consumers an exciting, interactive way to play video games. Augmented reality has also surfaced, which is technology that takes a computer-generated image and superimposes it over the view of the real world via smartphone. Pokémon Go is the perfect example of such technology that has skyrocketed in popularity. Users play the game as they did in the 90s, but they’re not controlling the trainer within the game – they are the trainer outside of it. Using a smartphone camera, players find and catch virtual Pokémon characters in real-life locations.
Harmless play or a potential lawsuit?
While the game may have a great reputation with its players, that’s not quite the case for innocent bystanders. Last summer, many homeowners began nuisance lawsuits against the app’s developing company Niantic, claiming that strangers, walking around in what seemed like an aimless manner, were disturbing them on their property.
However, Niantic has stressed that unless these strangers are trespassing on the property – not merely aiming their phone at it to collect a virtual Pokémon – then there’s nothing to dispute. He stressed that all users must agree to Terms and Trainer Guidelines before playing the game, which states that they cannot break a law to capture a Pokémon.
But homeowners are firing back, hoping for an adjustment to the meaning of trespassing – one that denies “virtual trespassing” as well. A statement regarding the proposition can be found in the opposition brief:
“Landowners should have a right to refuse the placement of virtual objects on their property – at least where those virtual objects create any kind of incentive for any persons to be in their physical proximity.”
Niantic responds
But Niantic isn’t standing for this. His reply echoed his earlier argument – that a person may not be punished for “virtual trespass” – if so, this will destroy many apps that consumers love and use on a daily basis. In a reply to the opposition, Niantic’s lawyers stated the following:
“This does not support Plaintiffs’ theory that property owners should be able to prevent app developers from displaying on-screen virtual objects on the devices of third parties, at virtual locations corresponding to being near the property owners’ properties. If accepted, it would threaten numerous online services. For instance, creators of apps that display on-screen markers (e.g., a walking tour app that flags landmarks or an app that permits users to ‘check-in’ virtually to a location to connect with friends) could be liable for trespass. There is no legal support for, and no need for, the expansion of the law Plaintiffs advocate, so the Court should reject their theory.”
Most social media apps, for example, give users the ability to “check-in” at a location. Snapchat uses on-screen markers to tag geographical locations in pictures as well. If the courts redefine the meaning of trespassing, with a virtual twist, apps may suffer after eliminating interactive features that attract users.