TSR Now it’s WotC’s Turn: WotC Moves Against TSR3

I guess after you provoke somebody enough, they’ll eventually bite back. The company has begun trademark cancellation procedures against the newest TSR.

TSR3 briefly filed for a court declaration on Dec 7th as to their ownership of the TSR trademarks — with an IndieGoGo campaign to fund it — and then voluntarily dismissed it a couple of days later on Dec 9th.

This filing is dated Dec 6th, the day before TSR3 launched its campaign.

In WotC’s response, they cite fraud as one of the causes of action, alleging that TSR3 misled the trademark office in its original application.

Mike Dunford, on Twitter, breaks down the action.

TSR - TSR3.5 Voluntarily Dismisses Lawsuit

A lawsuit filed by TSR3 against D&D owners Wizards of the Coast a few days ago was voluntarily dismissed. Dismissal without prejudice means that the suit can be filed again. The suit lasted two days from the 7th to the 9th of December. The IndieGoGo fundraiser to fund it is still running...

www.enworld.org

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...

www.enworld.org

 

[Stormonu]

As an aside: does anyone remember the last time that WotC had to go beyond a C&D to set boundaries with a third party company...? Because I sure don't.

I'm thinking the creators of the Book of Erotic Fantasy?

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

In the era of social capitol, attention is profit, and they’re definitely succeeding in getting attention. Their mistake isn’t lacking a plan, it’s that their plan is to get social capitol by being a nuisance to an entity with much more capitol - both social and fiscal.

Um, kind of, but not really.

I understand that people can say, "attention is profit" and it has a nice ring, kind of like "all publicity is good publicity."

But it's not true. All publicity is not, in fact, good publicity. And while it can be easier for people to monetize attention than it used to be, it is certainly not true that mere attention is profit. For every instagram influencer out there, there are tons of people who court attention (or achieve it) who were unable to monetize it. This can be especially true if your desired means of getting attention is, "Filing expensive lawsuits with no chance of success against well-heeled corporations with no desire to settle."

The sun will rise, the sun will set, attorneys will get paid, and everyone will forget about LaNasa and his crusade except the bill collectors.


TLDR; if your plan is to just get attention without thinking through the monetization part, you're missing the most important step.

 

[Ulfgeir]

So did "TSR 3.5" succeed with their Provoke-roll, or did they just do a critical fail? They wanted WotC's attention, and they got it. Something about being careful about what you wish for. Guess they should be glad it wasn't the highly trained attack-lawyers from Disney that they provoked.

 

[Mort]

So did "TSR 3.5" succeed with their Provoke-roll, or did they just do a critical fail? They wanted WotC's attention, and they got it. Something about being careful about what you wish for. Guess they should be glad it wasn't the highly trained attack-lawyers from Disney that they provoked.

WoTC is using a 500 attorney White shoe firm (BigLaw). This is EXACTLY who Disney hires when they want to sue someone.

TSR3 poked a very big bear here (I like the comparison a prior poster made. Attacking a Dragon Turtle with a wet noodle).

Edit: Just to avoid confusion - Biglaw just means big powerhouse lawfirm. Actual firm is Davis, Wright, Tremaine.

 

[dirtypool]

I mean, it's the highly trained lawyers from Hasbro, so they're just as good.

 

[darjr]

I mean, it's the highly trained lawyers from Hasbro, so they're just as good.

it looks like the lawyers the Hasbro lawyers aspire to be.

 

[grimslade]

We have reached the 'find out' phase of this farce. I assume WotC is filing this only for the 'man in the moon' because it is the most damning and easy to find on merit. Quick turnaround for a judgement against LaNasa and NuTSR and if he pokes his head out of the crater they will file another for another trade dress.
I doubt that LaNasa will be deterred in using WotC owned trade dress. So I expect that WotC and Tremaine will escalate in response.

 

[grimslade]

I mean, it's the highly trained lawyers from Hasbro, so they're just as good.

Tremaine are the lawyers other lawyers tell their children about to get them to eat their Brussel Sprouts. "Eat them all. Or Tremaine will pants you in court."

 

[Mort]

Tremaine are the lawyers other lawyers tell their children about to get them to eat their Brussel Sprouts. "Eat them all. Or Tremaine will pants you in court."

And BOTH of the names attached to the current action are partners. If LaNasa doesn't take this as seriously as he should it will be brutal.

 

[Benjamin Olson]

Looks like it is only for the "man in the moon" logo, not the lizardman, cone-hatted wizard or gold bar TSR logos?

I'm really confused by this. Is it all or nothing sort of thing - no use of TSR at all or just the depicted logo?

I think (based on a quick and lazy search of Trademark registrations) that Neo-TSR has currently registered design marks on the "man in the moon" logo and a variation on the the blocky diagonal letters logo, not the lizardman or wizard(man) logos.

The focus on this particular mark makes me think the Wizard's lawyers are not all that confident in their ability to claim general trademark rights to the various TSR marks as active trademarks (or don't want to risk an adverse ruling on WotC's ambiguous rights to them as trademarks), but that they think they have a stronger case that this particular, very distinctive mark, is misleading to the public (which is totally what neo-TSR is trying to do with it). On the "man in the moon" design there is a clear violation of WotC copyright even if they are found to have no valid trademark claim.