Ema's RPG Sheet Website down...

[arscott]

But I still see very little difference between 2 sites that both attract users using WotC IP, provide content and support for that IP and collect money to gain full access to tools and services on their respective sites. If the only difference between the 2 sites is the use of a logo or the copying of a few power cards, then I really don't understand why a C&D was required.

Khairn, what you don't seem to realize is that logo and the power card text ARE the WotC IP we're talking about. ENWorld doesn't "attract users using WotC IP" because they don't have that kind of stuff on here.

Putting up nifty character sheets as detailed and useful as the ones Ema had isn't illegal. Having a character generator isn't illegal, even if you charge for it. Ema could have provided services and content substantially similar to what he actually provided and stayed well within the bounds of law (or at minimum, in a light enough gray area that he wouldn't have gotten a C&D letter).

But instead, Ema chose to use WotC trademarked logos and trade dress when designing his character sheets, rather than creating his own artwork. He copied spell summaries directly from the books when he could have easily created his own.

 

[xechnao]

"Using IP" is not the issue; every newspaper and magazine in the world does it. The difference lies in the fair use uses which everybody keeps talking about; replicating content wholesale is not fair use; talking about IP and using it in reference in the ocntext of news, reviews and discussion, is.

There's no problem using IP; it's how you use it that matters.

Dont know about Enworld and business sites that behave as fan sites. These can be a problem. Fan derivative work is derivative work. IMO if Gleemax was to compete with Enworld and Hasbro saw that it would be more convenient for their business to act this way (C&D letters), they would have done so. Fact is that it is no convenient - the investment they would have to do to not allienate people in a harmful way for their business simply is not sound economically (and I believe this is true for all internet community businesses). So they approach and deal with it the different way: not the competing one but the collaborating one.

 

[dinelendarkstar]

www.heroforgesoftware.com

We are still here... for now

To add to this:

After now reading not only the entrie thread on the Wizards boards, and posting my opinion there, Wizards Community - View Single Post - emass-web.com - Cease and Desist?, and now all the posts in this thread, I have to say that this is a sad affair to say the least.

Since nobody does know what really happened it is hard to say how well anyone out there doing, or planning any, 4E stuff will fair.

I for one would love to see the actual C&D so we as a company in the possible same boat, could see exactally what we could be in for.

I just know as stated in my posts on the Wizards boards, that we went the route of actually trying to talk to WotC regarding what we planned on doing. And I am very sure in the knowing that they are not above the use of someone elses IP when they feel like it.

 

[The Little Raven]

Since nobody does know what really happened it is hard to say how well anyone out there doing, or planning any, 4E stuff will fair.

We do know that Ema's site wholly reprinting closed content, which is a legal no-no.

I for one would love to see the actual C&D so we as a company in the possible same boat, could see exactally what we could be in for.

If I made a 3.X character on your program with spells from Complete Mage, would you wholly reprint the entire text of the spell from the book? If so, then you're in trouble. If not, I doubt you'll be.

And I am very sure in the knowing that they are not above the use of someone elses IP when they feel like it.

Can you provide an example of WotC using someone else's IP without permission?

 

[xechnao]

Can you provide an example of WotC using someone else's IP without permission?

The most recent:
Suing WoTC?

EDIT I: I also have read somewhere here about some monsters regarding I think Necromancer games (necromancer asked permission to publish some monsters but Wotc later screwed up with OGL)-or something like that. And before Wizards produced D&D 3.0 there was a case about another rpg, do not remember the name though.

EDIT II: And there was another recent instance with their character visualizer user interface.

 

[dinelendarkstar]

We do know that Ema's site wholly reprinting closed content, which is a legal no-no.



If I made a 3.X character on your program with spells from Complete Mage, would you wholly reprint the entire text of the spell from the book? If so, then you're in trouble. If not, I doubt you'll be.



Can you provide an example of WotC using someone else's IP without permission?

Let's just say that the current Character Builder form WotC, at the time of GenCon this past year, didn't have certain features in it. As of now they do. Features that are not present in ANY of the other 3.5 or 4E character gens out right now.

Funny thing is that those features didn't appear until after we posted Screenshots of a couple pages of our upcoming app. These features had nothing to do with WotC IP but in all cases is our IP when it comes to the UI design of our app.

Now here comes the big question?
So should we be looking to C&D WotC for their use of our IP and design elements in a product that they make money on? I would love to hear some thought on that.

And no I am not saying that is what we are going to do but just asking the opinion of the board. I actually enjoy and respect the opinions of the members of this fine "FAN SITE - That is a business".

When it comes to the Ema site, what's done is done but now the question becomes, what is to come form this point forward?

I mean there are a lot of great companies out there that make Character Gens, PCGen, RPGxploer, HeroLab, ourselves (HeroForge) just to name a few. I feel WotC could be looking at this a lot different. They could be looking at this as a way to make money by granting a profitable licensing agreement too all of us in the business and see how a little friendly compition helps drive their sales not take from them.

I mean D&DI is a lot more than a Character Gen and is still very much worth paying for. So I don't see how companies like ours should be looked at as anything more than a possible avenue for helping them generate more income not less.

 

[alleynbard]

Let's just say that the current Character Builder form WotC, at the time of GenCon this past year, didn't have certain features in it. As of now they do. Features that are not present in ANY of the other 3.5 or 4E character gens out right now.

Funny thing is that those features didn't appear until after we posted Screenshots of a couple pages of our upcoming app. These features had nothing to do with WotC IP but in all cases is our IP when it comes to the UI design of our app.

Now here comes the big question?
So should we be looking to C&D WotC for their use of our IP and design elements in a product that they make money on? I would love to hear some thought on that.

Do you honestly have proof that WotC took anything from you? Do you have any proof that the material in question wasn't in development independently of your product?


In the end, the burden of proof lies on you. If you don't have proof, then sending out a C&D letter to Wizards will do nothing. But if you do believe something is fishy, then you need better advice than you can find here.

Quite honestly, asking about legal information from the ENWorld message board strikes me as odd. If you truly think your IP was violated, talk to a lawyer. Otherwise, it seems like you are stirring the pot with a company you want to have a good working relationship with in the future.

 

[The Little Raven]

So should we be looking to C&D WotC for their use of our IP and design elements in a product that they make money on?

Can you actually prove that these elements are in fact IP and protected by laws? Can you prove that they are using YOUR IP directly, as opposed to parallel development? Just vaguely saying "I didn't see them having this feature until after we openly stated we'd have it" isn't legally sound unless you can prove these things.

When it comes to the Ema site, what's done is done but now the question becomes, what is to come form this point forward?

I expect that more people would understand not to wholly reprint WotC's content without permission.

I mean D&DI is a lot more than a Character Gen and is still very much worth paying for. So I don't see how companies like ours should be looked at as anything more than a possible avenue for helping them generate more income not less.

I agree, so long as your program doesn't do what Ema's site did: wholly reprint WotC's closed content.

 

[alleynbard]

The most recent:
Suing WoTC?

EDIT I: I also have read somewhere here about some monsters regarding I think Necromancer games (necromancer asked permission to publish some monsters but Wotc later screwed up with OGL)-or something like that. And before Wizards produced D&D 3.0 there was a case about another rpg, do not remember the name though.

EDIT II: And there was another recent instance with their character visualizer user interface.

In the first instance, I find it strange nothing else was heard from the original poster. Either his lawyer told him to shut his mouth about the case or nothing came from it.

The second situation you mention has to do with the MMII. They used monsters that were open source but forgot to place the OGL in the book.

The third situation has to do with Palladium. In the early days of Wizards, they created a book called Primal Order which referenced Palladium IP. The case was settled out of court and Wizards promised never to reference Palladium material ever again.

Finally, the last thing you cite has to do with the game table and not the visualizer. Images that were meant to stay in-house were released to the public. They contained images of dice from Fantasy Grounds. The company sent WotC a C&D. Wizards apologized and the offending material was removed and replaced with the proper images.

 

[The Little Raven]

The most recent:
Suing WoTC?

Okay, so a thread on another site from June, 2008 in which a guy claims to have a case against WotC for 'stealing his font,' with no indication of whether the case was successfully executed, nor whether the judge agreed there was a violation. I see some guy making a claim, saying his lawyer agrees he has a case, and he plans on filing it. A lawyer agreeing he has a case doesn't prove anything about whether WotC did, in fact, use his IP without permission. Lawyers have been known to agree that a client has a case, even when the court has thrown them out, since they get paid for taking on the case (not saying the lawyer doesn't honestly agree with the client in all cases).

EDIT II: And there was another recent instance with their character visualizer user interface.

I remember that. The dice looked exactly the same, except for color. Anyone got any links on how that went? I remember a few years back, a game was accused of stealing art assets directly from Half-Life 2 and later it was discovered that both Valve and the "thief" company bought their textures from a 3rd-party company and the accusations were just knee-jerk internet reactions.