Question for Scott Rouse re: Retroclones

[Jack99]

Originally Posted by Morrus

I think you are mistaken as to Scott Rouse's job. His job isn't to say "how high?" whenever joethelawyer says "jump"! It isn't to make binding legal statements on the internet in response to random posters who just yesterday were crowing how karmic it was that their products get pirated.



You aren't "offering" them anything. If they choose to make any policy statements, they will do so according to their own procedures. They won't do so on a thread on the internet, and nor should they.



Yes, Joe. That's clear. We all gathered that.



IF it "deserves" an answer (which is a premise I don't agree with in the first place - they don't owe you an answer), you aren't the person who deserves that answer. Any legal relationship betwene a company and WotC is a private relationship; you aren't privy to that and, again, nor should you be.

If you produce an OSRIC-like system, then contact WotC directly. A third party callng them out on a random thread on teh intrawebs? Not so much.

The thing is, you know this, Joe. You say you're a lawyer, right? Does your company make legal policy on random messageboards when someone on the internet posts a thread demanding that they do so? No, of course not.

You deserve some XP, and not just because you are the boss..

Originally Posted by xechnao

It is part of his job. Interacting with the public on behalf of the image of his company. Same way as it was part of the developers' and designers' job to offer podcasts and blogs for marketing reasons. As for the free time argument? This is nonsense. Scott is not a manual labourer.

I doubt it's Scott's job to chase down what their customers think and ask about on random messageboards and interact with them. On WotC's own boards, yes, that's probably part of his job description. But ENworld? Nah...

[xechnao]

Originally Posted by Piratecat

P&P, thanks for that clarification.

If I were going to make a guess - and that's all this is, a guess - WotC took a look at this and said "we think it's an infringement, but what does a lawsuit trigger? Disappointed fans and poor PR, all to shut down people who aren't making significant money from the game and who love D&D. Lots of downside, very little upside." So they've chosen to delay legal action in the hopes that it flies under the radar until something changes that forces them to address it.

It could be this. Sending C&D letters to OSRIC would not be exactly the same as the C&D letters they sent to character sheets -not the same for the hobby population. But exactly for this reason, I believe more and more OSRIC becomes popular the more difficulty they will have trying to settle this. Most probably what happened is that they tried to stop it first place at its launch, as P&P narrates here, but did not manage to win.

[xechnao]

Originally Posted by Jack99

I doubt it's Scott's job to chase down what their customers think and ask about on random messageboards and interact with them. On WotC's own boards, yes, that's probably part of his job description. But ENworld? Nah...

Cause ENWorld is such an irrelevant community to D&D. Especially during 4E's launch. Yeah right..

[Windjammer]

Originally Posted by Morrus

combined with the fact that you went to law school which suggests a certain level of intelligence and are aware of the above, you'll understand why folks are having trouble assigning good motives to the question.

I could be reading this wrong, but this comes off as a veiled insult.

And whence the preoccupation to detect/impugn "motifs" to the asking of questions instead of wishing to see them answered?

I'm sure you (and, more specifically, PirateCat) remember the other recent thread where Scott did respond to a question asked. It was a headache with all the people chiming in how Scott shouldn't go on answering ("please don't answer, you've answered all we* want to know already - don't continue answering, it's a YES/NO TRAP (tM)!!!!!"), and I was glad to see Scott could respond more fully before the thread got locked.

*Read: me and my two buddies.

[thecasualoblivion]

Originally Posted by xechnao

Cause ENWorld is such an irrelevant community to D&D. Especially during 4E's launch. Yeah right..

I wouldn't call ENWorld an irrelevant community, but it also is the home forum of the general OGL movement and tends to overstate its importance, not unlike how Paizo's forums overstate the importance of that game or even WotCs own forums overstating their own importance.

[jaerdaph]

Originally Posted by xechnao

Oh come on. This has nothing to do with it and no one is on the right here. The matter or the debate is mostly political and highly relevant. The way I understand it, this has been the interactive forum of the 3pp industry. What matters should rise, on what form and style, how tough the debate should be it is all political and relevant.

*shrugs*

I'd rather just play D&D.

[thecasualoblivion]

Originally Posted by Windjammer

I could be reading this wrong, but this comes off as a veiled insult.

And whence the preoccupation to detect/impugn "motifs" to the asking of questions instead of wishing to see them answered?

I'm sure you (and, more specifically, PirateCat) remember the other recent thread where Scott did respond to a question asked. It was a headache with all the people chiming in how Scott shouldn't go on answering ("please don't answer, you've answered all we* want to know already - don't continue answering, it's a YES/NO TRAP (tM)!!!!!"), and I was glad to see Scott could respond more fully before the thread got locked.

*Read: me and my two buddies.

Just because these forums have standards doesn't completely absolve you from being called on bad behavior when you are perpetrating bad behavior.

[xechnao]

Originally Posted by thecasualoblivion

I wouldn't call ENWorld an irrelevant community, but it also is the home forum of the general OGL movement and tends to overstate its importance, not unlike how Paizo's forums overstate the importance of that game or even WotCs own forums overstating their own importance.

You are correct in what you say. But still ENWorld has been one of the biggest customer base targets for D&D. This is what matters for Wotc.

[jgbrowning]

Originally Posted by Piratecat

P&P, thanks for that clarification.

If I were going to make a guess - and that's all this is, a guess - WotC took a look at this and said "we think it's an infringement, but what does a lawsuit trigger? Disappointed fans and poor PR, all to shut down people who aren't making significant money from the game and who love D&D. Lots of downside, very little upside." So they've chosen to delay legal action in the hopes that it flies under the radar until something changes that forces them to address it.

The only thing known positively is that the legal department of WotC has known about OSRIC for years and done nothing. Ascribing a motive to that inaction is pure speculation.

I suspect, however, if OSRIC has already been deemed 100% legal by WotC, the only thing we can count on with certainty is continued inaction without comment, similar to what has already occurred. I don't think we will ever see confirmation about this - there is nothing to gain, only things to lose.

And for those who consider OSRIC infringing, I would appreciate pointing out the specific textual examples that makes one believe such. I've looked and I can't find any, but I'm assuming those who think it infringing have found something I'm missing, or else they wouldn't hold that opinion. (EDIT: and if you don't want to discuss it publicly, my e-mail is josephbrowning@gmail.com)

joe b.

[Nikosandros]

Originally Posted by Piratecat

P&P, thanks for that clarification.

If I were going to make a guess - and that's all this is, a guess - WotC took a look at this and said "we think it's an infringement, but what does a lawsuit trigger? Disappointed fans and poor PR, all to shut down people who aren't making significant money from the game and who love D&D. Lots of downside, very little upside." So they've chosen to delay legal action in the hopes that it flies under the radar until something changes that forces them to address it.

That's not how I read it. It seems to me that the brand license manager asked for the distribution of OSRIC to be interrupted without having a clear view of the situation. Later, WotC legal found that they had no case and they dropped the issue.

[thecasualoblivion]

Originally Posted by Nikosandros

That's not how I read it. It seems to me that the brand license manager asked for the distribution of OSRIC to be interrupted without having a clear view of the situation. Later, WotC legal found that they had no case and they dropped the issue.

Splitting hairs, I'd say there is a difference between there being no case and there being a case that wouldn't be worth pursuing. Both to WotC, and interested 3rd parties.

The reality being in that limbo generally results in silence, which is what we have.

[Piratecat]

Originally Posted by jgbrowning

The only thing known positively is that the legal department of WotC has known about OSRIC for years and done nothing. Ascribing a motive to that inaction is pure speculation.

It sure is! That's why my post had a bolded "this is only a guess!" line. Hey, at least I'm explicit about it.

[Halivar]

Well, if it's any consolation to WotC, I just purchased the $30 OSRIC hardcover off Lulu.com, and WotC isn't losing one cent of revenue off the purchase; I'm still buying Divine Power when it comes out.

[Remathilis]

Originally Posted by xechnao

It could be this. Sending C&D letters to OSRIC would not be exactly the same as the C&D letters they sent to character sheets -not the same for the hobby population. But exactly for this reason, I believe more and more OSRIC becomes popular the more difficulty they will have trying to settle this. Most probably what happened is that they tried to stop it first place at its launch, as P&P narrates here, but did not manage to win.

I'm sorry, but if ANYONE thinks any retro-clone is going to become so big as to actually challenge WotC's sales numbers, I think they're a bit too optimistic. The Retros have their place; they cater to the segment of D&D players who never left the 1980s and haven't been WotC's demographic for years. And aside from a small group of players who will get into the games from more recent editions (the "throwback" players, named after the Pepsi products) I don't see the movement expanding enough to challenge WotC, or even Paizo, in total sales.

[Mark]

Originally Posted by thecasualoblivion

The reality being in that limbo generally results in silence, which is what we have.

Ergo, my not having heard from WotC in regard to my 3.5 SRD Revised* OGL product, and someone having once erroneously posted that they didn't understand why it was legal, means WotC are considering suing me? I hope not.



* There's the link, Halivar.

[xechnao]

Originally Posted by Remathilis

I'm sorry, but if ANYONE thinks any retro-clone is going to become so big as to actually challenge WotC's sales numbers, I think they're a bit too optimistic. The Retros have their place; they cater to the segment of D&D players who never left the 1980s. And aside from a small group of players who will get into the games from more recent editions (the "throwback" players, named after the Pepsi products) I don't see the movement expanding enough to challenge WotC, or even Paizo, in total sales.

Yep, it is mostly a matter of trend to the D&D hardcore fan base. Not of direct sales. I guess it is not a challenge because there is nothing that they can do about it that would be worthing the price they would have to pay. Certainly it is not threatening by any means Wotc existence, as you put it.

[Jack99]

Originally Posted by xechnao

Cause ENWorld is such an irrelevant community to D&D. Especially during 4E's launch. Yeah right..

I never said it was irrelevant. Of course it isn't.

[xechnao]

Originally Posted by Jack99

I never said it was irrelevant. Of course it isn't.

I am pretty sure you did. Regarding Scott's job. But I guess it doesn't matter to discuss about it. We are making more noise than any sense here. All of us. Except Hairfoot.
I want to requote him for truth

If the clones are potentially a target for Hasbro's legal department, I want to know now, because the only reason they're not throwing cease-and-desists around is because they don't see a threat to Hasbro profits.

"Big Brother will destroy your game if it becomes popular" is not a reasonable or tolerable situation for people to game under.

[Mallus]

Originally Posted by Hairfoot

If the clones are potentially a target for Hasbro's legal department, I want to know now, because the only reason they're not throwing cease-and-desists around is because they don't see a threat to Hasbro profits.

Why does it matter to you? Just play the game, officially sanctioned or not, that entertains you.

If one was inclined to be charitable, one could consider WotC's stance on the retroclones to be a kind of 'fair use'. They're allowing these fan creations so long as they don't develop into serious competitor products. For the life of me I can't see the malevolence in that. In fact, they're turning a blind eye towards fan creations that have left the realm of 'fan creation' behind and are, in fact, commercial products.

It seems rather nice for corporate behavior. It's certainly nothing like TSR trying to trademark the word 'elf'.

And seeing as the retroclones aren't likely to become serious competitor products --which shouldn't be construed as a knock against them-- I don't what the fuss is about.

"Big Brother will destroy your game if it becomes popular" is not a reasonable or tolerable situation for people to game under.

The 1984 reference is doubleplusungood.

Will the secret police drag you away to Minigame for reeducation if you continue playing OSRIC after a hypothetical cease-and-desist is issued?

[xechnao]

Originally Posted by Mallus

Why does it matter to you?

It is a principle to consider or debate about. How much power should businesses have. How should they operate. How should the economy operate. Cause you know even the games that get developed and how we play and entertain ourselves are subject to this parameter.