Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="flip" data-source="post: 1452133" data-attributes="member: 17911">Just gonna weigh in and clarify a few things.by way of introduction, I'm one of the greybeards of the DS community, and a founding staffer of athas.org ...First point:&nbsp; Monsters.&nbsp; There's a very simple reason that Dungeon didn't look at or consider our published monsters:&nbsp; They weren't published when the article was written.&nbsp; This is a magazine folks; they have to do a lot more layout than we do.&nbsp; The article deadline was probably at least two months before the print run began, and there were probably a couple of rounds of editing that went in before that.While portions of Terrors of Athas have been available for a long time, they were never really published ... preview versions, and some individual monsters, yes, but not exactly easily available.&nbsp; The full version wasn't posted until a month ago.&nbsp; There's no way it could have been used, or referenced by, Dungeon.Second:&nbsp; I spoke to the Editor in Chief at Pazio several months ago.&nbsp; He informed me that Dave Noonan has made it a point not to read or consult any of the athas.org material.&nbsp; This is likely from a CYA perspective, in the case that we might decide to flip out an accuse him of stealing our work ... or to avoid doing so subconciously.Because of Dragon/Dungeon's publishing policy, they couldn't take the approach of just talking to us first.&nbsp; Essentially, they can't/won't publish anything that has been published elsewhere (even on the Internet) ... some kind of Copyright issue; I think they claim ownership of all submissions.Third:&nbsp; The terms of our original agreement with Wizards state that all of the Dead-Worlds sites were the custodians of their particular world, and were authorized to produce official material.&nbsp; There are certain limitations on this:We can't make money off the setting.&nbsp; If we charge anything for products, it's materials only.&nbsp; Our primary method of distribution is on-line.&nbsp; We can't kill off or otherwise majorly affect any iconic characters.&nbsp; We have to use D&amp;D.&nbsp; We can't run our own services (bbs, web-based chat, etc), we're to direct fans to the WotC provided boards.&nbsp; Not everything published on the site is official: only our PDFs are actually considered to be official products (not a WotC policy there, it's one of ours).I'm not demanding that Pazio should have used our material.&nbsp; I understand the reasons and the rationale.&nbsp; I would have liked it if we were invited to help contribute.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="flip, post: 1452133, member: 17911"] Just gonna weigh in and clarify a few things. by way of introduction, I'm one of the greybeards of the DS community, and a founding staffer of athas.org ... First point: Monsters. There's a very simple reason that Dungeon didn't look at or consider our published monsters: They weren't published when the article was written. This is a magazine folks; they have to do a lot more layout than we do. The article deadline was probably at least two months before the print run began, and there were probably a couple of rounds of editing that went in before that. While portions of [i]Terrors of Athas[/i] have been available for a long time, they were never really published ... preview versions, and some individual monsters, yes, but not exactly easily available. The full version wasn't posted until a month ago. There's [i]no way[/i] it could have been used, or referenced by, Dungeon. Second: I spoke to the Editor in Chief at Pazio several months ago. He informed me that Dave Noonan has made it a point [i]not[/i] to read or consult any of the athas.org material. This is likely from a CYA perspective, in the case that we might decide to flip out an accuse him of stealing our work ... or to avoid doing so subconciously. Because of Dragon/Dungeon's publishing policy, they couldn't take the approach of just [i]talking[/i] to us first. Essentially, they can't/won't publish anything that has been published elsewhere (even on the Internet) ... some kind of Copyright issue; I think they claim ownership of all submissions. Third: The terms of our original agreement with Wizards state that all of the Dead-Worlds sites were the custodians of their particular world, and were authorized to produce official material. There are certain limitations on this: We can't make money off the setting. If we charge anything for products, it's materials only. Our primary method of distribution is on-line. We can't kill off or otherwise majorly affect any iconic characters. We have to use D&D. We can't run our own services (bbs, web-based chat, etc), we're to direct fans to the WotC provided boards. Not everything published on the site is official: only our PDFs are actually considered to be official products (not a WotC policy there, it's one of ours). I'm not demanding that Pazio should have used our material. I understand the reasons and the rationale. I [i]would[/i] have liked it if we were invited to help contribute. [/QUOTE]

Verification