NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="JohnRTroy" data-source="post: 9115195" data-attributes="member: 2732">A few quick observations.<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">All we know for certain is that the estate is in a neutral parties hands, and both this auction and the licensing of the IP is to pay for those fees.  Nothing has been decided.  The re-introduction of product is a temporary thing for now.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The judge mentioned trademarks.  The will specifically states use of his name.  While Gail had the trademark to Gygax, Luke trademarked GaryCon and they've used caricatures of Gary and images of him.  Potentially the use of that trademark could also become property of the estate.   While it is not the full GG or EGG, we all know which Gygax or Gary was being referenced in both cases.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Rob Kuntz is asking for his castle levels back.  Depending on what the court grants, this will probably affect what can be in the Castle Zagyg project if it continues, as I suspect the dispute of ownership was between him and Gary.</li> </ul>The key thing will be the final decision.  The will clearly states that all property except some very specific giftable items and the IP belong to Gail, and that Gail is to control it for her lifetime.  For argument, I'll assume that the decision of the IP is the only one that could change, as that is the only major item that will be inherited.I see three possible outcomes for the IP based on this:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Gail retains controls of it.  There may be limits on it -- at minimum, in addition to the natural restriction on it from the term "use and enjoyment", I suspect at minimum she will be accountable to produce financial statements to all the prospective heirs.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">It is put in the hands a neutral party to manage -- Gail gets the profits from it while she lives, but the control is done by the estate manager, with or without recommendations by the other parties of interest.  When Gail dies, it gets transfered like it would have anyway.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Gail forfeits it and it goes in the hands of all six kids, who then may be free (based on majority vote) to license it, sell it, do what they want with it, etc.</li> </ul>This will all depend on how the judge considers the arguments.  The non-delivery of the will may be considered, as well as the lack of use of the IP -- the latter might be considered misuse depending on how the petitioner's side argues their case.  However, the estate is still intact -- the non delivery of it doesn't materially change the state of the estate, unlike other cases where actual property set aside for others was sold, transferred, or perverted in intent, and I'm sure the other side will argue that.  And there's also no standard that Gail has to maximize the profit of the IP portion either.  That part is really fuzzy.  The judge has to balance all these factors as well as still try to execute the Will as written as best as they possibly can.All this is pretty hard to predict.</blockquote>

Verification