1994 The year I got married, had a kid, bought a house, and some more dice. Have two those still. :01994 the year I learnt the internet existed and my brother bought me my first set of dice which I still have.
I always thought it ironic (and a bit hypocritical) for Gary to go so hard after any perceived violation of TSR IP after how he created the game in the first place (stealing other's IP, and doing it in such a lazy way where it would have been easy to get permission).
Edit I know full well Gary wasn't part of TSR in 1994 when this article takes place, but when he was still part of the company, he was very much "my way or the highway, and nobody better use D&D stuff without my permission."
I understand why they did it, just pointing out the irony of them being so adamant about it when Gary created the game by stealing others' IP and being sued for it on multiple occasions.
"Companies that fail to defend their trademarks can lose them. Just ask the original makers of cellophane, escalators, and trampolines. However, D&D fans and TSR would debate how much copyright law justified the company’s cease-and-desist notices."
AAAARGH!
Don't mind me, one of my biggest pet peeves is people who talk like we're supposed to think they're authorities on IP law, but don't even understand the difference between trademark and copyright...
(And, it's not just a case of accidentally using the wrong word. The error is much more substantial than that, though it's not clear to me if it's Repp's, the blogger's, or both. It is trademarks you can lose if you don't defend them, though not quite so easily as was made out here, but it was mostly copyright violations, if anything, that TSR went after. IANAL but as far as I can tell, it was vanishingly unlikely they were going to lose any IP rights over any of this stuff.)
I was in Korea from 92-96, with no access to internet at all then, so I missed this whole usenet thing as well. We just played D&D in the barracks oblivious to what was going on in the digital world.I missed this era almost entirely. I stopped gaming from about 94 to 97. Mostly because I was busy with my band and "too cool" to game. I got over that, naturally. I was rather bemused to return and see all the "T$R" and "They Sue Regularly" posts in newsgroups.
Until the OGL, D&D always walked this tough line between encouraging fan creativity and enforcing their IP and vision of the game. Even in the 1e era, you saw this vacillation between "make this game your own" and "if you change anything you're not actually playing AD&D anymore."
I also suspect the copious cease-and-desists they sent out came from a lawyer (or someone else) that really didn't understand the internet, as many did not back then.
I was in Korea from 92-96, with no access to internet at all then, so I missed this whole usenet thing as well. We just played D&D in the barracks oblivious to what was going on in the digital world.
I'd add also that in addition to the fact that you, indeed, can't lose your copyright that way, 'defending' a trademark includes things like 'giving permission' or 'creating a license [like the OGL or d20 System STL]' or an online marketplace [like DMs Guild] or numerous other positive things you can choose to do rather than a C&D. 'Defending' is a word with baggage; I prefer 'protecting'. You don't want people to infringe on your IP, but there are many ways you can allow them to use your IP. Which means that claiming one has to declare war on their fans because the law is forcing them to is disingenuous at best. You never have to do that; you choose to."Companies that fail to defend their trademarks can lose them. Just ask the original makers of cellophane, escalators, and trampolines. However, D&D fans and TSR would debate how much copyright law justified the company’s cease-and-desist notices."
AAAARGH!
Don't mind me, one of my biggest pet peeves is people who talk like we're supposed to think they're authorities on IP law, but don't even understand the difference between trademark and copyright...
(And, it's not just a case of accidentally using the wrong word. The error is much more substantial than that, though it's not clear to me if it's Repp's, the blogger's, or both. It is trademarks you can lose if you don't defend them, though not quite so easily as was made out here, but it was mostly copyright violations, if anything, that TSR went after. IANAL but as far as I can tell, it was vanishingly unlikely they were going to lose any IP rights over any of this stuff.)