Question for Scott Rouse re: Retroclones

[Jack99]

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..

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.