• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

Dear Wizards of the Coast blog post...

MerricB

Eternal Optimist
Supporter
Bastion Press was the company that did the bulk of the scanning. It was run by Jim Butler, previously of Wizards. It should be noted that this was about 10 years ago the bulk of the scanning was done, and technology was nowhere near as advanced as it is now.

One of the definite drawbacks of the scanning process was that the products had to disassembled (cut up).

From Jim Butler, posting on Dragonsfoot:
Jim Butler said:
Just before I left WotC, I managed to convince the company that they shouldn't cancel it. The costs for scanning in the Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance, and Dark Sun materials were too high. And the company we were dealing with wouldn't budge on price.

So, when I started Bastion Press I took the scanning with me. WotC had new rules to follow (keep costs down; keep file sizes small; produce no more than 6/week because that's all our online store can process; etc.). As they laid off more and more staff, there was no one who had time to adequately review the materials for errors (and even the readers we hired missed lots of things).

The small file sizes resulted in a number of quality complaints (due to the resolution we had to use to keep file sizes reasonable for WotC). I eventually convinced them to drop the file size requirement, and our later scans were amazingly better. But they didn't want to pay for the older products to be rescanned.

When Wizards sold the online store to another company, they ran into revenue issues internally. While the scanning program eventually paid for itself, it never paid back the scanning costs for the products in the same quarter those costs were incurred. So, WotC cancelled the program because it couldn't pay for itself fast enough.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

IanB

First Post
I asked for proof because he presented it more as a fact and less as an opinion. And the assertion wasn't specific to any one artist; it was TSR products in general and -particularly- the art. All of it.

He might be right. I think it would be odd, since TSR wasn't really shy with the lawyers and not locking down ownership seems rather unprofessional, but I'm not a RPG publishing company.

Saying "it is unlikely" is hardly presenting something as fact.
 

I asked for proof because he presented it more as a fact and less as an opinion. And the assertion wasn't specific to any one artist; it was TSR products in general and -particularly- the art. All of it.

He might be right. I think it would be odd, since TSR wasn't really shy with the lawyers and not locking down ownership seems rather unprofessional, but I'm not a RPG publishing company.

If the Stephen Fabian stuff was true, i think it is a good indication it may be the case. For those who dont know Fabian's art pretty much defined the ravenloft setting, and their inability to use it in other books drastically changed the tone. I dont know the specifics but it sounds like they only secured the rights to use the images in specific books. This would mean a reprint b wotc with the art could be problematic if the case. So while they had the rights to put images x,y, and z in the van richten guide to lycanthropes they were not supposed to put them in later books like Domains of Dread. Again going by memory here. Entirely possible I am mangling the history.

In terms of not locking down ownership,it has less to do with being professional and more to do with costs and what the artist and company are both willing to agree to. Ideally you secure the full rights to the art but sometimes you can save money (and therefore get more images) if you agree only to use them for a single project and allow the artist to retain IP.
 

jadrax

Adventurer
I asked for proof because he presented it more as a fact and less as an opinion. And the assertion wasn't specific to any one artist; it was TSR products in general and -particularly- the art. All of it.

He might be right. I think it would be odd, since TSR wasn't really shy with the lawyers and not locking down ownership seems rather unprofessional, but I'm not a RPG publishing company.

From what little I know of the UK at least, copyright law in regard to 'Art' is an absolute nightmare and changes seemingly at whim. Discussing it is a great way to get your lawyer to turn interesting shades of puce and complain about judges at length. I assume the US is pretty much the same.
 

MerricB

Eternal Optimist
Supporter
If the Stephen Fabian stuff was true,

It's true according to the artist.

Art Gallery
Stephen Fabian said:
During the 1980s I did a lot of artwork for "TSR," the publisher of "Dungeons & Dragons". The editor I dealt with was Peggy Cooper. She and her husband came to my home one day, stopping over on their way to a convention in New York. From the beginning, Peggy sent me lucrative assignments paying thousands of dollars each, which of course made my life so much easier to manage.

But then, TSR hired an efficiency expert who promptly re-organized the company, letting go several employees, including Peggy, and notified me, as well as all the other TSR artists, that from now on all artwork contracted by TSR would be considered "Work for Hire".

Before this change in policy, TSR had purchased only the First North American Printing Rights to artwork, to be used for a specific one-time use, the original artwork was returned to the artist with no restrictions. And any furthur use of the artwork by TSR, for reprint editions, posters, T-Shirts, whatever, would require a new contract with the artist for both permission and royalty payments.

But now, the new "work for hire" contract meant that TSR would own all the rights to my artwork, could use it in any way they chose and not have to pay me any royalties. And, in the future, I could not have my artwork published elsewhere, or even sell the original art, without their permission.

When I received a phone call from a TSR lawyer, explaining the new "rules" to me, I got so mad I told him what he could do with his new TSR contract and went ahead and retired.

When TSR shamefully changed their contracts to a "work for Hire" one, they took away the artist's rights to their own artwork. Which in terms of labor relations, took us back to the days of sweat shops and piece work. I refused to sign such a contract!

I once asked the editor what the letters "TSR" represented, and after asking around she told me nobody there knows. Anyway, I still own all the rights to the TSR artwork that I did before the the contract became "work for hire," otherwise, I would have had to get TSR's permission to present this picture on my website.

(You can find the quotes if you search for TSR or lawyer or suchlike. It's under the entry for GUIDEBOOK TO TALADAS 1 & 2)

This puts a MAJOR problem in the way of reprinting older adventures...

Cheers!
 

Dire Bare

Legend
This puts a MAJOR problem in the way of reprinting older adventures...

Huh, I thought that the TSR "work-for-hire" contracts covered all the gaming material, and the only issues were with some older, well, issues of Dragon Mag . . . I suppose it makes more sense if older material in general has rights issues.

WotC did scan a lot of material that would have predated Fabian's split with TSR, I wonder if rights issues were actually one of the reasons they pulled the PDFs?
 

MerricB

Eternal Optimist
Supporter
If you ever want to see problematic rights in action, just look at the announced reprint of Merchant of Venus, where two companies are trying to reprint it at the same time, one with rights from the game's designer, and the other with the rights from Avalon Hill/Hasbro.

Although Fabian does not like the work-for-hire contract, it's become painfully clear in recent years why companies need to use them.
 

jadrax

Adventurer
Huh, I thought that the TSR "work-for-hire" contracts covered all the gaming material, and the only issues were with some older, well, issues of Dragon Mag . . . I suppose it makes more sense if older material in general has rights issues.

From what I understand, the prime problem with a lot of the older Work-for-Hire contracts is that judges have a habit of deciding they not actually currently legal.*

*This relates to Work-for-hire contacts in a nebulous general way, I am not commenting directly upon the TSR contracts or any other contract specifically.
 

mudbunny

Community Supporter
Take a good hard look at diablo 3 and tell me you don't see the slot machine basis. The game requires no cleverness, no insight, no character growth or meaningful discovery. Seriously compare the degree of discovery in Super Mario Bros. 3 to Diablo 3 and you will find Diablo 3 wanting.

There is as much innovation and discovery in D3 as there was in D2...10 years ago. Anyone playing D3 who doesn't see the giant Skinner box that is the game isn't looking very hard.

See also HALO, COD, MW, MMOs (for the most part). There is a reason why a lot of development houses (be they movies, video games or what have you) don't innovate a whole lot. People like what they like. It is a whole lot easier (and a lot less risky) to simply feed those that belly up to the bar as opposed to trying to find a whole new crowd.
 
Last edited:


Remove ads

Top