Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 9243393" data-attributes="member: 177">I don't think so.&nbsp; In the business world, there's a big difference between a deal that is &quot;unfair&quot;, and one that is just not as advantageous as it could be for one of the parties.The word &quot;unfair&quot; has strong emotional connotations we shouldn't usually associate with larger corporate entities.&nbsp; It is unlikely that anyone felt so strongly about it as to label it &quot;unfair&quot;.We are talking about events from nearly a quarter century ago - indeed, while I don't have the most recent demographics, about a third of folks currently playing the game (the 15-24 age bracket) weren't even born when this happened.&nbsp; However, what you describe here does not match my memory of events or the relationship between Hasbro, WotC, and the property at the time.&nbsp; There was nothing secret about the OGL.&nbsp; It isn't that, &quot;they weren't paying attention, so the OGL was released.&quot;&nbsp; My understanding is that Hasbro was, at the time, taking the (actually wise) move of not taking over direct management of WotC business activities.&nbsp; So, it was less &quot;we are not paying attention,&quot; and more &quot;we are specifically allowing you go about business largely independently&quot; - an active choice, rather than neglect.Again, they bought it for the card games.&nbsp; In effect, they paid a lot for Magic: the Gathering&nbsp; (and, at the time Pokemon). They didn't pay a lot for D&amp;D.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Umbran, post: 9243393, member: 177"] I don't think so. In the business world, there's a big difference between a deal that is "unfair", and one that is just not as advantageous as it could be for one of the parties. The word "unfair" has strong emotional connotations we shouldn't usually associate with larger corporate entities. It is unlikely that anyone felt so strongly about it as to label it "unfair". We are talking about events from nearly a quarter century ago - indeed, while I don't have the most recent demographics, about a third of folks currently playing the game (the 15-24 age bracket) weren't even born when this happened. However, what you describe here does not match my memory of events or the relationship between Hasbro, WotC, and the property at the time. There was nothing secret about the OGL. It isn't that, "they weren't paying attention, so the OGL was released." My understanding is that Hasbro was, at the time, taking the (actually wise) move of not taking over direct management of WotC business activities. So, it was less "we are not paying attention," and more "we are specifically allowing you go about business largely independently" - an active choice, rather than neglect. Again, they bought it for the card games. In effect, they paid a lot for [I]Magic: the Gathering [/I](and, at the time Pokemon). They didn't pay a lot for D&D. [/QUOTE]

Verification