ATTN Piazo: Dungeon mag and Dragon mag CD-roms & the Tasini v NY Times decision
- Thread starter frankthedm
- Start date
johnsemlak
First Post
Ah, looking back at Henry's post, I believe you're right. My bad.Aaron L said:
Beard in the Sky
First Post
johnsemlak said:
I heard from several sources right after the Dragon CD was released that WotC didn't see the kind of sales to justify the cost and effort of releasing Dungeon, but I would -love- to have that.
Goobermunch
Explorer
Speaking as a lawyer, it ain't a lawsuit until someone files a complaint. However, just because someone's filed a complaint, doesn't mean the parties are no longer engaged in cooperative negotiations. Sometimes, you've got to file the suit in order or protect your rights.
So, at the end of the day, it's entirely possible that both Sean and JollyBGood are correct.
--G
So, at the end of the day, it's entirely possible that both Sean and JollyBGood are correct.
--G
Last edited:
WizarDru
Adventurer
You ask a bunch of different questions there, and I'm not sure how to answer all of them, so I'll just discuss how I see the situation. I certainly don't think that any of those viewpoints discuss the broad opinion of the boards, if such an ephemeral thing exists.silentspace said:
First off, folks want stuff. Seriously. Many of our current technological debates center around the distribution of copyrighted materials and the new models for said distribution. Traditional channels are being challenged in different ways, from Blair Witch to Napster to DC++, and all of it because of the simple fact that people want stuff. There are many different approaches to the probelm, from the Grateful Dead's open-taping policy to the RIAA's legal wranglings. However, most folks don't give a damn either way...they just want their stuff. The tenet of 'information wants to be free' is another way of saying "I don't care if you have the right to NOT publish something, I still want it, anyways."
That said, the issue centers around a couple of issues. First, the concept of work-for-hire and freelance contracts...in this case producing a written work for a periodical. Second, the changing nature of media distribution, specifically new forms of media distribution that simply didn't exist at the time of prior contracts. How those issues are resolved is what the central discussion is concerned with. This problem greatly mimics a similar situation that faced the comic-book industry a few decades ago, and came to a head in the mid 70s-early 80s, and a similar battle that was fought within the music industry for decades.
At issue is the question of reproduction rights, and whether or not the original authors are owed further renumeration after a particular work is re-issued or reused in some fashion. For example, Jack Kirby created thousands of pages of material for Marvel comics over the course of his career. However, his contracts (while generous compared to his peers at the time) gave him no money when Marvel extensively reprinted his works throughout the 70s...and they destroyed his original storyboards as often as not, to prevent him from selling them to collectors, after the fact. Compare that with the situation of Bob Kane, creator of Batman. Kane stopped doing Batman relatively early, but he had an excellent lawyer and some shrewd business skills, and his name still appears on every Batman production to this day. Compare this unethical and extremely unpleasant treatment Siegel and Schuster, creators of Superman, received from the same publisher.
The point being this: the original authors, artists and so forth signed different contracts at different time periods, presumably with different rights signed away. Releasing such a CD with an electronic archive (or allowing access to an online library of PDFs, or what have you) was clearly not envisioned until relatively recently. Further, the assumptions that were in force with one iteration of TSR or WOTC's management may not have been reasonable with another...and in some cases, there may have been an expiration to the rights or any number of other issues. I think it's safe to assume that the contracts under Gary's reign were much less stringent and draconian (and perhaps less sound business-wise, as well) than that of....HER.
Consider the case for the video and later DVD releases of the animated movie, Heavy Metal, and the CD release of the Soundtrack. There was a significant delay in the CD issue and an even longer one in the release of the DVD. Why? Many of the same reasons you see here with the Dragon Archive. Musical groups hand't agreed to a CD, only a tape and vinyl recording. The movie required even more negotiations, since various artists whose stories had been used were now involved. Complicate this further with artists dying in the ensuing period, bands breaking up and reforming, record and movie companies being bought out, closing, reorganizing and so forth....and you've got one hell of a mess. Spiderman movie, anyone? Consider that some folks have died, some had dropped out of sight (Trampier) and some were already badly burnt during TSR's final dark days.
So what do I want? Well, I've got the archive, already.
But seriously, what I'd like to see is the artists get what they legally are entitled to. Artwork is easier to apply a future market value to, but in many cases, the real issue is one of reasonable expectations. It's already been mentioned that the archive didn't sell astoundingly well...I think that it's reasonable to believe it never would. It's a nostalgia item for some, and it's a niche market to begin with.
So do I think that writers who wrote an article on the "new, improved super-duper Jester NPC class variant #8" should receive nothing for their work? Well, if the contract signed away their rights, and it was reasonable at the time...then yes, I think I do. There certainly wasn't any expectation of attaining great riches in the RPG industry. The most successful companies involved in the industry today are ones with business-savvy owners or managers.
Ideally, a situation might be developed like that of Carl Barks and Disney. Carl Barks, for those unfamiliar with him, is nothing short of an comic-book art legend. Ever read a Donald Duck story as a kid? That was him, most likely. He did hundreds of them. The Duck Tales TV show was populated almost entirely out of Bark's works. Ask many of today's top artists, and they'll quote his name, for his mastery of layout, his fantastic command of perspective and scenery and so on. (But I digress...) In the 80s, Barks, then retired, began doing commisioned paintings for enthusiasts. IIRC, someone wrote him and asked if he would paint them a Donald and Scrooge picture, and he'd pay him several hundred dollars for it. At this same time, Disney had been reprinting some of his work, for no additional money, for decades. Barks wasn't poor, but he wasn't rich, either. A bit suprised, he began commisioning works and discovered a plethora of enthusiastic fans willing to pay thousands for commisioned works of the Disney characters he embellished or often created. Barks checked with Disney, and they OKed. Later, they changed their minds, and then later changed it again, often commisioning original works from Barks directly. All of which is a long way to say that perhaps WotC could negotiate some deals with some of these writers to give them some leeway in updating some of their material, if it's relevant to do so.
I mean, let's be honest, here. Most RPG writers are doing it as much for the prestige of being published or getting the material out there as they are of actually turning any sort of profit. It's easy to forget, 20 years later, that someone producing a 5,000 word article for a magazine with a readership of perhaps 50,000 readers would be eager to sign away rights that likely were worthless at the time.
If you're still here
)), I guess what I'm saying is that it's not a simple answer. I wouldn't like to see creators robbed of their fair share of a creative work...but at the same time, they assumed the risk of such an event when they signed the original contracts. For the writers in the late 70s through the 80s, it would reasonable to assume they had a right to renegotiate such issues (as the whole spectrum of distribution had changed, and simple 'electronic rights' would be insufficient)....but someone in 1996 should have been able to see the possibility, unless they were wilfully ignoring the web.
Kesh
First Post
silentspace said:
You've basically got it right. IANAL, but I read up on the Tasini case after the NG case ruling came up.
Basically, in Tasini, the Federal judge (not the SCOTUS... it never went that high, IIRC, or was turned down for review) ruled that the CDs were effectively "new works" and thus the original authors/artists were entitled to royalties for them. That sparked companies to change their boilerplate contracts to include electronic media in the future. The contracts already allowed for paper re-prints, as long as the full work was represented (i.e. using a photgraph in a different article was a "new work").
Flash forward to December. A judge in a seperate district rules that National Geographic's art CDs are a simple republication, and thus do not incur royalties. Now, if the Federal court in that district upholds his ruling, we will have two different rulings in two seperate Federal courts. The only resolution will be for the National Geographic ruling to go to the Supreme Court, where a final precident will be set.
silentspace
First Post
Thanks to everyone for explaining/clarifying this for me - I think I understand it much better now. Really interesting stuff!
I think Sean and Jolly got a bit off topic with the Kenzerco thing. Sean did state his opinion on how he'd feel about seeing his stuff reprinted (the gist was he'd be glad if someone wanted his old stuff).
Jolly didn't answer that, though some of it was implied by the fact that he did negotiate some sort of first print rights to his stuff. Since Jolly's stuff is mostly art/comic which ages better (ie. his old stuff is relvant today), his concern might be different than Sean, who's earliest material was likely 2nd Ed. which is OOP. Perhaps a fair question to Jolly is, would he want a piece of the action if someone were to reprint his old magazine articles, or some such in a big collection CD?
Wizardru's got the right point. People want stuff. We also don't want to lose stuff. Most of the stuff in Dragon is the only place it was published. If we don't scan it and put it on CD, we risk losing it. For 30 years worth of material, charged at $50 a CD, we can't afford to pay every guy for reprint costs. Nor can we afford to lose this material. True, not all of it is valuable, but often, we don't know until later, the value of something.
This is old stuff. The artists and writers aren't being hurt. They may be denied more profits, but no one's taking money from them. Paying them, would likely make these archive CDs impossible to release. That's the real waste. The fact of the matter is, yes, Jolly's strips are reprinted in the Dragon Archive CD. I didn't buy it for his cartoons. Heck, I have the originals, as well as his reprint books. So he hasn't lost any money. And somebody who buys the Dragon CD just to get the KoDT strips and not buy from Jolly, isn't going to give Jolly their money anyway.
Janx
Jolly didn't answer that, though some of it was implied by the fact that he did negotiate some sort of first print rights to his stuff. Since Jolly's stuff is mostly art/comic which ages better (ie. his old stuff is relvant today), his concern might be different than Sean, who's earliest material was likely 2nd Ed. which is OOP. Perhaps a fair question to Jolly is, would he want a piece of the action if someone were to reprint his old magazine articles, or some such in a big collection CD?
Wizardru's got the right point. People want stuff. We also don't want to lose stuff. Most of the stuff in Dragon is the only place it was published. If we don't scan it and put it on CD, we risk losing it. For 30 years worth of material, charged at $50 a CD, we can't afford to pay every guy for reprint costs. Nor can we afford to lose this material. True, not all of it is valuable, but often, we don't know until later, the value of something.
This is old stuff. The artists and writers aren't being hurt. They may be denied more profits, but no one's taking money from them. Paying them, would likely make these archive CDs impossible to release. That's the real waste. The fact of the matter is, yes, Jolly's strips are reprinted in the Dragon Archive CD. I didn't buy it for his cartoons. Heck, I have the originals, as well as his reprint books. So he hasn't lost any money. And somebody who buys the Dragon CD just to get the KoDT strips and not buy from Jolly, isn't going to give Jolly their money anyway.
Janx
Calico_Jack73
First Post
Drat!!! I was always hoping for a Dungeon collection on CD-ROM. I find Dungeon more helpful than Dragon. If game night comes along and I have writer's block I can always pull out a copy of Dungeon and run something even if I only have 30 minutes till gametime.
silentspace
First Post
Janx said:
Yes, they were definitely off-topic and clearly had their own axes to grind.
Back on topic though, I'm not sure I agree. If someone wants to buy a Dragon CD, why does he not want to give Jolly their money? They have no problem giving the publishers their money, the office staff, the cleaning staff, the landlords the publishers are paying rent to, etc. Why not to Jolly as well?
Again, I don't know much about the industry, but as I said earlier, I don't think the writers will be asking for "millions" as some think. They may not even ask for anything. And some of their contracts are probably written so that they can't ask for anything. Jolly said that his contract was written to include the publisher's rights to republish electronically, but he negotiated that out. I would guess that a lot of people didn't negotiate that out so don't have a say in it either way. I would further guess that those who do have a say (those who negotiated their rights) won't ask for much, will they? They probably weren't paid much for their original articles. So I doubt they would turn around now and demand "millions".
I do see the problem with finding some of the writers from the old days, but really, how big of a problem is that? So what, they have to make a few phone calls? And if they can't locate a writer, then just don't include their work. Simple. Sorry, I just don't have much sympathy for the publishers here.
