D&D 5E D&D Beyond Cancels Competition

D&D Beyond has been running an art contest which asked creators to enter D&D-themed portrait frame. DDB got to use any or all of the entries, while the winner and some runners up received some digital content as a prize.

There was a backlash -- and DDB has cancelled the contest.

Thank you to all of our community for sharing your comments and concerns regarding our anniversary Frame Design Contest.

While we wanted to celebrate fan art as a part of our upcoming anniversary, it's clear that our community disagrees with the way we approached it. We've heard your feedback, and will be pulling the contest.

We will also strive to do better as we continue to look for ways to showcase the passion and creativity of our fellow D&D players and fans in the future. Our team will be taking this as a learning moment, and as encouragement to further educate ourselves in this pursuit.

Your feedback is absolutely instrumental to us, and we are always happy to listen and grow in response to our community's needs and concerns. Thank you all again for giving us the opportunity to review this event, and take the appropriate action.

The company went on to say:

Members of our community raised concerns about the contest’s impact on artists and designers, and the implications of running a contest to create art where only some entrants would receive a prize, and that the prize was exclusively digital material on D&D Beyond. Issues were similarly raised with regards to the contest terms and conditions. Though the entrants would all retain ownership of their design to use in any way they saw fit, including selling, printing, or reproducing, it also granted D&D Beyond rights to use submitted designs in the future. We have listened to these concerns, and in response closed the competition. We’ll be looking at ways we can better uplift our community, while also doing fun community events, in the future.

Competitions where the company in question acquires rights to all entries are generally frowned upon (unless you're WotC).

 

[Dire Bare]

The long and the short of it, participation trophies were most associated with millennials who were given awards for participating in sporting events even if they didn't place 1st, 2nd or third. i.e. If you showed up that day you got an award. This coincided with a time when some sports leagues were experimenting with not keeping score during games. Defenders of the practice argued that participation trophies prevented children from feeling bad about not winning and taught them that whatever effort they put into something was good enough. Critics thought participation trophies was a bunch of horse hockey because kids knew they weren't real and it taught kids that whatever effort they put into something was good enough. I can't tell you how prevalent participation trophies actually were as I don't have children of my own.

As a Gen-Xer myself, I never got a participation trophy. If I didn't place in the top three I didn't get any award. I don't really know if participation trophies are still a thing.

Complaining about participation trophies and the millennial generation often goes hand-in-hand, but it's complete BS, just like complaints about political correctness and cancel culture. All of these things exist in real life, but not to the degree and kind that folks complain about, and none of it is new.

I'm Gen-X, and I got plenty of participation trophies when I was a kid, as did my dad, a Boomer.

 

[Hussar]

This was already addressed upthread. Copyright infringement suit is not limited to exact copy. It is "points of similarity". Taking submissions without that clause means that to be safe they not only don't have not sell/use the original, but they have to never do anything even coincidentally too similar.

Prolific author, J. Michael Straczinski (Babylon 5, Sense8, many comic series) is very active on social media - and he frequently makes the point that if people ever give him story ideas, or ask, "Why didn't you ever do <story idea>?" they are essentially making sure he never will use that idea, because there's now a question of who came up with it.

And, even if they are going to win, the lawsuit is a pain in the neck and a potential PR issue for the future.

Which is to say - your assertion there is equivalent to, "The innocent have nothing to fear from courts," which I think will not pass empirical examination.

/edit

Reading fail on my part. My 100% bad.

 

[KarinsDad]

I'm Gen-X, and I got plenty of participation trophies when I was a kid, as did my dad, a Boomer.

Your dad must have lived in a different part of the country than I did. I never saw a participation trophy until my daughter got them.

And even participation trophies are fine for difficult activities like running a mile as a kid. Just not for everything that they are handed out for.

 

[MGibster]

Complaining about participation trophies and the millennial generation often goes hand-in-hand, but it's complete BS, just like complaints about political correctness and cancel culture. All of these things exist in real life, but not to the degree and kind that folks complain about, and none of it is new.

Yeah, and I should make it clear that I don't have a problem with millennials or those who are younger. I ran the (paid) intern program at work for two years and I still help with recruiting every year. The experiences we've had with these younger workers over the last 5+ years has been overwhelmingly positive.

'm Gen-X, and I got plenty of participation trophies when I was a kid, as did my dad, a Boomer.

The only time I ever got a participation trophy was in Germany when I went on volksmarches. I did once get second place in a wrestling tournament by virtue of there being only one other person in my weight class that day. I never bothered putting that medal on display because it was a rather hollow.

 

[Dire Bare]

Your dad must have lived in a different part of the country than I did. I never saw a participation trophy until my daughter got them.

And even participation trophies are fine for difficult activities like running a mile as a kid. Just not for everything that they are handed out for.

OK. Shrug.

 

[Fox Lee]

Bet.

On D&D Beyond's initial contest announcement, there are 119 quote retweets. (clipped)

I will also add myself to this list, as somebody who a) absolutely called them out on Twitter for this, and b) is an artist. Indeed, their announcement only crossed my feed in the first place because of a fellow artist doing exactly the same thing. We are absolutely the ones most likely to call out spec work in our own field. How anybody could claim that the negative response didn't come from artists is beyond me, and certainly reads as a bad-faith attempt to devalue the criticism.

 

[TheSword]

I will also add myself to this list, as somebody who a) absolutely called them out on Twitter for this, and b) is an artist. Indeed, their announcement only crossed my feed in the first place because of a fellow artist doing exactly the same thing. We are absolutely the ones most likely to call out spec work in our own field. How anybody could claim that the negative response didn't come from artists is beyond me, and certainly reads as a bad-faith attempt to devalue the criticism.

It was in response to a poster claiming that the competition was pulled because enough artists complained. My point was that not all the people complaining were artists, we don’t know how much of this was a wider PR issue and how much was the result of people who would have been affected by the specific competition. You seem to be confirming that it was an ideological point for you and you would never have seen the competition otherwise for your friend posting as well.

My point stands then, that It’s a shame that a competition to draw something - that was never for sale - was spoiled for amateurs because professionals who had no intention of entering, kicked up a stink.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

I will also add myself to this list, as somebody who a) absolutely called them out on Twitter for this, and b) is an artist. Indeed, their announcement only crossed my feed in the first place because of a fellow artist doing exactly the same thing. We are absolutely the ones most likely to call out spec work in our own field. How anybody could claim that the negative response didn't come from artists is beyond me, and certainly reads as a bad-faith attempt to devalue the criticism.

Do you use D&D Beyond for your 5e games?

 

[PsyzhranV2]

It was in response to a poster claiming that the competition was pulled because enough artists complained. My point was that not all the people complaining were artists, we don’t know how much of this was a wider PR issue and how much was the result of people who would have been affected by the specific competition. You seem to be confirming that it was an ideological point for you and you would never have seen the competition otherwise for your friend posting as well.

My point stands then, that It’s a shame that a competition to draw something - that was never for sale - was spoiled for amateurs because professionals who had no intention of entering, kicked up a stink.

The "professional" class of artists you keep alluding too are either already employed/on contract and have a steady income, or are celebrities who probably didn't even notice this contest, much less even think about participating in it. What, do you think Tony DiTerlizzi or Larry Elmore wanted to ruin things for the newbies?

The "amateurs" you keep trying to white knight for are the exact same people who sounded the alarm in the first place. Newsflash: the "starving artist" trope actually does have some basis in reality. Or do you think an artist having a Patreon open but which doesn't cover their cost of living, or doing paid comissions for 2-3 digit prices, or even just having a Ko-Fi open for $2 donations is suddenly a "professional"? I think you're using that word in a way that might be technically correct under the most tortured of readings, but the connotations of which does not apply to this clas of artists in the slightest.

 

[FrogReaver]

The "professional" class of artists you keep alluding too are either already employed/on contract and have a steady income, or are celebrities who probably didn't even notice this contest, much less even think about participating in it. What, do you think Tony DiTerlizzi or Larry Elmore wanted to ruin things for the newbies?

The "amateurs" you keep trying to white knight for are the exact same people who sounded the alarm in the first place. Newsflash: the "starving artist" trope actually does have some basis in reality. Or do you think an artist having a Patreon open but which doesn't cover their cost of living, or doing paid comissions for 2-3 digit prices, or even just having a Ko-Fi open for $2 donations is suddenly a "professional"? I think you're using that word in a way that might be technically correct under the most tortured of readings, but the connotations of which does not apply to this clas of artists in the slightest.

The term white knight has always bothered me. It implies that one cannot be genuinely concerned for others. That ones concern is always simply to make themselves look good. I find both of those ideas wrong and dangerous.

also, to turn this on its head for a moment so we can easily see the truth, why are you white knighting for those artists that wanted this contest ended? *Note it’s just the notion that your white knighting is acceptable and his is not that I’m contrasting.

#no more dismissive terms