Scandal: Pokémon TCG Pocket removes Ho-Oh and Lugia cards due to plagiarism allegations

The highly anticipated release of the Marine and Sky Saber expansion in Pokémon TCG Pocket was shaken by an unexpected controversy: two of its most valuable cards, Ho-Oh and Lugia in immersive versions, were temporarily removed from the game after it was discovered that their artwork had allegedly been plagiarized from fan art published in 2021.

According to an official announcement by The Pokémon Company, the responsible artist allegedly copied key elements from the work of a fan known as Ianjiujiu, whose illustration of Ho-Oh bears a striking resemblance to the one used on the game card. The perspective, proportions, and shape of the wings match almost exactly, which prompted the company's swift intervention.

Immersive cards suspended and new artwork on the way

Scandal: Pokémon TCG Pocket removes Ho-Oh and Lugia cards due to plagiarism allegations | La Derecha Diario

Immersive cards are one of the main visual attractions of the game: they allow for an interactive experience in which the user "enters" the animated illustration of the Pokémon. However, in this expansion, both Ho-Oh and Lugia were partially removed and replaced by a temporary marker with the legend "new art coming soon."

This way, those who obtain these cards do not lose them, but they do have to wait until the official artwork is redesigned. The developer's quick response was well received by the community, which values both transparency and the commitment to content integrity.

A striking but controlled episode

Despite the initial commotion, the company acted swiftly,  making it clear that it doesn't tolerate inappropriate practices in the design process. Although the episode represents a setback for the expansion's debut, the situation appears to be on track to be solved without major consequences for players.

The community, meanwhile, has already turned these cards into collector's items due to their "provisional" nature, while awaiting the new official artwork. Meanwhile, the case reopens the debate about the improper use of fan-made content in commercial productions and quality control in collaborations with external artists.