TSR TSR3.5 Launches IndieGogo Campaign to "Stop" WotC

The latest in the TSR3 saga, which has gone quiet for a while, is a new IndieGoGo campaign launched to "stop Wizards of the Coast". They cite wrongful bullying of TSR, and refusal to answer requests that WotC show TSR "proof of their claims" (although the campaign page doesn't mention what those claims are).

The IndieGoGo campaign was launched yesterday and has so far raised $675 (at the time of writing).

The action TSR seeks is a "Trademark Declaratory Judgement of Ownership" which is a court declaration about the status of something in dispute.

TSR has launched a campaign to stop Wizards of the Coast

Become a Champion of TSR and Support TSR’s campaign against Wizards of the Coast!

TSR is taking a stand against Wizards of the Coast (“WOTC”) and its wrongful bullying of TSR, our trademarks, and its public libeling and slander of all those who helped create TSR based Dungeons & Dragons and products.

Wizards of the Coast has continually bullied TSR regarding TSR’s legally owned Trademarks. Wizards of the Coast has refused to answer all of TSR's repeated requests that they show any proof of their claims. Wizards of the Coast has the vast resources behind them and is implying to bring them to bear down on TSR.


The new TSR suffered widespread pushback when it launched, which they blamed on WotC, claiming that they were under a "coordinated assault across various channels being mounted.... by [WotC]" The company announced itself earlier this year, having acquired the TSR trademark after the previous holder accidentally let it lapse. It was run by Ernie Gygax, Justin LaNasa, and Stephen Dinehart. After several weeks of controversy, the company split into two -- Wonderfilled (Stephen Dinehart), and TSR (Ernie Gygax and Justin LaNasa).


zw5pyzcqtfqc7xu2.jpg


The page also indicates an intention to "fight to have WotC's legacy product disclaimer removed" from older products (that's the disclaimer on the older books available on DMs Guild which indicates that those books are products of their time) by claiming that the disclaimer portrays the creators of those older products as "as supporting those alleged prejudices, stereotypes and bigotry, wrongfully claimed to be part of those products".


TSR will also Fight to Have the WOTC Legacy Disclaimer Removed

TSR is suing WOTC for Trademark Declaratory Judgement of Ownership . TSR will also pursue in the near future having WOTC remove the legacy content disclaimer placed on TSR based Dungeons & Dragons and other products, and retractions of any other libel and slander which alleges that racism and other heinous beliefs are incorporated into those products.

This disclaimer attempts to make a statement of fact argument, and therefore paints all of the writers, editors, artists and consumers of those products as supporting those alleged prejudices, stereotypes and bigotry, wrongfully claimed to be part of those products. This statement by Wizards of the Coast opens the possibility for the producers and players of these "Legacy Products" to face ridicule, and face the labeling as "bigots", "racists", "misogynists", and worse Cyber & Physical Attacks!

Wizards of the Coast legacy content disclaimer.

"We (Wizards) recognize that some of the legacy content available on this website does not reflect the values of the Dungeons & Dragons franchise today. Some older content may reflect ethnic, racial, and gender prejudice that were commonplace in American society at that time. These depictions were wrong then and are wrong today. This content is presented as it was originally created, because to do otherwise would be the same as claiming these prejudices never existed. Dungeons & Dragons teaches that diversity is a strength, and we strive to make our D&D products as welcoming and inclusive as possible. This part of our work will never end".


TSR3's Justin LaNasa spoke about the campaign in a YouTube video.


 

log in or register to remove this ad

WoTC would have to ask for attorney's fees, but a dismissal doesn't generally preclude that. A court could dismiss the case on whatever grounds, but retain jurisdiction to determine if awarding attorney's fees is warranted.

No. It's prevailing party fees. Generally, a dismissal without prejudice does not operate on the merits, and does not entitle a party to prevailing party fees, since there is no prevailing party. There are exceptions to everything, but that's a good way to think about it.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Eh, maybe. If it's a dismissal on venue or jurisdiction (not on the merits), then there are no attorney's fees because there's no prevailing party.

I say maybe because not all dismissals are equal. But if, for example, TSR(cubed) voluntarily dismissed, then no, they would likely not be liable for attorney's fees.

That would likely be WoTC's attorney's first move (because litigation is stupid expensive).

Call NewTSR's attorney and tell them that IF they voluntarily dismiss the complaint (like right now) WoTC won't push for fees.
 

I say maybe because not all dismissals are equal. But if, for example, TSR(cubed) voluntarily dismissed, then no, they would likely not be liable for attorney's fees.
Voluntarily dismissing? Maybe if they realize how screwed they are should they lose, but I wonder if even then, since they would lose face with their rabid supporters if TSR3 were the ones that stopped it from moving forward.
 

No. It's prevailing party fees. Generally, a dismissal without prejudice does not operate on the merits, and does not entitle a party to prevailing party fees, since there is no prevailing party. There are exceptions to everything, but that's a good way to think about it.
Depends, Copyright litigation is weird and I'm not familiar with it. But yes, generally you have to win/lose to trigger a loser pays provision - so voluntary dismissal likely won't. But, also generally, it's on motion - so it's usually up to the judge.
 

No. It's prevailing party fees. Generally, a dismissal without prejudice does not operate on the merits, and does not entitle a party to prevailing party fees, since there is no prevailing party. There are exceptions to everything, but that's a good way to think about it.

And on that note too - Frankly I don't think WoTC would have all that hard a time convincing a judge that this lawsuit qualifies as frivolous!

It's usually quite hard, but you can get fees on that ground too. And you don't have to "win" you just have to show the other side wasted your (and the courts) time.

Regardless, this just seems like a stupid, stupid gambit.
 


That would likely be WoTC's attorney's first move (because litigation is stupid expensive).

Call NewTSR's attorney and tell them that IF they voluntarily dismiss the complaint (like right now) WoTC won't push for fees.
Which also assumes that they would have to adhere to the original C&D, and stop using TSR and associated logos. Boy, wouldn't that be schadenfreude.

From my seat, this is a win win for me. Either they lose everything in court, or at the very least have to give up all of those logos and trademarks they are basing their entire business plan on. Without those trademarks, they are just another OSR indie publisher as far as the general consumer knows.
 



Voluntarily dismissing? Maybe if they realize how screwed they are should they lose, but I wonder if even then, since they would lose face with their rabid supporters if TSR3 were the ones that stopped it from moving forward.
Though, I suspect NewTSR sees themselves as the rebels in this scenario!
 

Attachments

  • evacuate-in-our-moment-of-triumph-i-think-you-overestimate-their-chances.jpg
    evacuate-in-our-moment-of-triumph-i-think-you-overestimate-their-chances.jpg
    64.9 KB · Views: 84

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top