New GSL Announcement

[WinningerR]

Hmm, I could have sworn I read a judgement (preliminary finding?) that Mayfair were liable for breach of contract re the TM license. It looked like Mayfair got screwed over badly by the earlier settlement, which put TSR in a much stronger position than they would have been in without any license.

Which may be relevant to the GSL.

The document that most people are familiar with (someone linked to it upthread) is a judge's ruling on various pre-trial motions in the second lawsuit. It was basically a mixed bag with a couple of rulings in favor of TSR and a couple of rulings in favor of Mayfair. In essence, the judge found that Mayfair did technically violate the earlier licensing agreement with TSR in a couple of instances but that these breeches were too minor to render the earlier agreement null and void (which TSR asked for). The critical question of whether or not TSR actually suffered any damages from the minor contract violations was left for trial, though the judge himself expressed doubts in his ruling.

This second case wasn't about whether or not Mayfair violated TSR's trademark rights (as the initial poster suggested). It was about whether or not Mayfair materially violated its licensing agreement with TSR.

 

[Mark Hope]

29 pages and at last something worthy of comment comes up.

>points with beaming smile at Kubicki Factor bass in avatar<

That's my baby right there. Fender Jazz basses are sweeet, though. And I've heard nothing but good things about Stingrays.

Anybody wanna buy a fretless Rickenbacker? Great bass but not getting the use out of it that I wanted and I could put the cash towards a fretless Kubicki instead

Er, in a vain attempt to remain on-topic...

....umm....

Nope. Sorry. I got nothing...

 

[S'mon]

The document that most people are familiar with (someone linked to it upthread) is a judge's ruling on various pre-trial motions in the second lawsuit. It was basically a mixed bag with a couple of rulings in favor of TSR and a couple of rulings in favor of Mayfair. In essence, the judge found that Mayfair did technically violate the earlier licensing agreement with TSR in a couple of instances but that these breeches were too minor to render the earlier agreement null and void (which TSR asked for). The critical question of whether or not TSR actually suffered any damages from the minor contract violations was left for trial, though the judge himself expressed doubts in his ruling.

This second case wasn't about whether or not Mayfair violated TSR's trademark rights (as the initial poster suggested). It was about whether or not Mayfair materially violated its licensing agreement with TSR.

Thanks. It's funny how Chinese whispers can turn that into "Mayfair was found guilty of copyright infringement".

 

[DaveMage]

Let's not jump to conclusions...

I imagine it would be difficult to pay you for something he's not allowed to see.

 

[Flynn]

A question for the moderators: Is this thread large enough that it is in danger of being locked down and another opened to carry on the discussions here? Seems I remember something of that nature becoming a policy a few weeks ago, and figured I should check before the big news comes down in the next day or three.

With Regards,
Flynn

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

I imagine it would be difficult to pay you for something he's not allowed to see.

I've paid for things I wasn't allowed to touch...

 

[Goobermunch]

Nice. Told (via the previously-quoted forum post, and even more directly via email) to expect communication on Monday. But no, yet again.

I guess we should all be in the habit by now of multiplying all GSL-related WotC time estimates by a factor of 4.


I mean, sure -- why would they want to have a clearly-spelled out Q&A on the subject prepared and ready to go during the week when almost every major publisher will be able to meet with them face-to-face in Vegas? Why, that's crazy-talk!


...and I'm sorry -- the fact that folks are in separate locations doesn't wash as an excuse for delays. If my small company can manage 4-6 person Skype conferences with participants spread across the US and Europe, surely WotC can cope.

The level of corporate incompetence here has grown beyond merely 'unbelievable', and into the realm of 'staggering.'

My sympathy for Scott and Linae is immense, and I'm nearly positive this is Dilbert-esque corporate idiocy imposed upon them -- which they're being forced to bear the brunt of --- but come ON. Is there any part of the announcement, implementation, roll-out and PR surrounding this issue that WotC *hasn't* screwed up?

It's not the fact that people are in different locations, it's the fact that those people are all involved working on projects that have to be completed at those locations.

My boss and I were in different locations all day on Friday. He was driving from Nebraska to Sioux Falls, SD. I was in Denver. Sure, we could have had a telephone conference about the projects I'm working on. The only problem is that I was in a meeting with a Ph.D, a P.E., and a fencing contractor trying to explain why tension wires are a necessary part of fence construction.

It would have been rude to ignore them to talk to him.

As Scott mentions three posts down from yours.

--G

 

[Goobermunch]

I've paid for things I wasn't allowed to touch...

Did you have to sit on your hands?

--G

 

[Zaister]

I've paid for things I wasn't allowed to touch...

Does your wife know about that?

 

[Delta]

A question for the moderators: Is this thread large enough that it is in danger of being locked down and another opened to carry on the discussions here?

You may be right. The limit mentioned was 1,000 posts.
http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=219220