Ema's RPG Sheet Website down...

[arscott]

Let's just say that the current Character Builder form WotC, at the time of GenCon this past year, didn't have certain features in it. As of now they do. Features that are not present in ANY of the other 3.5 or 4E character gens out right now.

Funny thing is that those features didn't appear until after we posted Screenshots of a couple pages of our upcoming app. These features had nothing to do with WotC IP but in all cases is our IP when it comes to the UI design of our app.

Now here comes the big question?
So should we be looking to C&D WotC for their use of our IP and design elements in a product that they make money on? I would love to hear some thought on that.

Do you have a patent for these features? In general, software features aren't covered by copyright law. WotC is allowed to use your ideas without compensating you, just as you are allowed to use the idea of a character defined by his STR, CON, DEX, INT, WIS, and CHA scores without compensating them.

If your ideas are innovative enough to be patentable, then you could spend a lot of money to patent them, but it almost certainly wouldn't be worth it.

No, he aint silly. It has been said here that one has to defend his copyright or may risk disputes about his rights if he knowingly allow use of his copyright to thirds. Why this isn't the case here? Arguments can come from both sides in a drama. Unless you admit even passionate loving fans can be a bit silly too

There are three kinds of IP in the US: Patents (protection of inventions), Trademarks (protection of brand names and logos), and Copyright (protection of artistic and textual expressons)

Patents don't really come up much--you have to pay quite a bit of money for them, and they're so narrow in their application that the gaming world doesn't really bother with them. (Though apparently WotC was granted a patant on the 'tapping' mechanic from MtG. This doesn't seem to have had much effect).

Copyrights and Trademarks come up quite a bit more often. Ema's website violated both. But there's still a number of distinctions. Copyright is automatic (you don't have to apply for it or pay a fee, though you can choose to do so anyway in order to make it easier for you to legally defend your copyrighted material). Trademark is not automatic. You have to pay a fee to register the trademark, and renew it every so often. You also have to defend it--If people use your trademark in ways not permitted by law and you let it slide, you make eventually lose your right to use the name exclusively (for example, Yo-Yo used to be a trademarked brand name, but any toymaker can now use the name).

ENWorld's Avatars probably violate WotC's copyright. But WotC doesn't have to defend copyright. If ENWorld used WotC's logos, or used their brand names in ways that caused confusion between WotC's products and ENWorld's, then that would be a Trademark violation and WotC would be legally required to step in.

That said, your certainly right about ENWorld's avatars. Morrus, if you're reading this, please consider removing all copyrighted art from your generic avatar banks. If I had to spend entire minutes in MS Paint making my avatar, then other ENWorlders should too.

 

[xechnao]

So since it was asked for the entire site to go down and not just the trademarks this seems to be mostly a matter of actual competition rather than a worry about trademarks. Hmm, in this case it seems that even if Ema did not charge for anything, the site most probably would have been sought to go down the same.
I though that doing so it could be a PR and marketing problem for Wotc but it seems it is not. Hopefully more so if their product has considerably more quality value than what they have closed down.

 

[mxyzplk]

So what is ENWorld's exposure in this?

Without a decent fan site policy and revised GSL, it's a bit tenuous.

- ENWorld posts character sheets and power cards, including some power cards with FR IP (see downloads section under that hot little succubus).
- ENWorld charges for community supporter accounts.
- Where do blogs/wikis/etc stop and "software" begin? Do you think that's obvious to a 65-year-old judge in Texas somewhere?
- the avatar icons are really the least of it.

And, of course, in any kind of community site with blogs, forums, wikis - it's very hard to control what people post.

The problem with the corp-friendly IP laws we live under is that *legally*, they could shut ENWorld down tomorrow. It's just a fact of life. There's enough "IP infringement" here that at a bare minimum it would go into litigation long enough to completely bankrupt the site.

So until and unless WotC publishes a real policy - which really isn't in their best interests to do as it constrains them - you should just get comfortable with "any site that even mentions 'Dungeons & Dragons' is existing at Hasbro's whim." Yes you, random blogger who just published a 4e version of Santa Claus for Christmas.

But don't worry - we're at the very bottom of their priority list.

 

[tomBitonti]

It works this way. You make the application or software for games. Companies that make games may choose to license it from you or not for their games. You cant offer though something that draws from their games' IP without license from them.

I imagine is that they are licensing trademarks and logos and such, and possibly the right to reproduce certain text.

(IMO, see my prior posts), you don't need a license to make a character generator, or to make a reference listing of powers. My understanding is that you could create a power card printer, as long as you did not reproduce the (copyrighted) text of the powers.

 

[tomBitonti]

Finally, the last thing you cite has to do with the game table and not the visualizer. Images that were meant to stay in-house were released to the public. They contained images of dice from Fantasy Grounds. The company sent WotC a C&D. Wizards apologized and the offending material was removed and replaced with the proper images.

I added the bold.

Whether the images were meant to stay in-house doesn't matter. (And, IMO, a claim in this regard would actually be taken unfavorably. If I were a judge such a statement would draw my ire.) This was a blatant use, something that developers are coached strongly to not do, and the sort of use that create liabilities and gets people fired.

In WotC's defense, I cannot imagine that they do not have a proactive program to educate their employees, and I cannot imagine that they do not react swiftly to any such problems to remedy them. Can you imaging the harm if they had to pull one of the 4E books because they used someone's art without permission?

 

[Jack99]

Uncalled for, Jack. You're out of this thread.

 

[catsclaw227]

So until and unless WotC publishes a real policy - which really isn't in their best interests to do as it constrains them - you should just get comfortable with "any site that even mentions 'Dungeons & Dragons' is existing at Hasbro's whim." Yes you, random blogger who just published a 4e version of Santa Claus for Christmas.

I think this is taking it a bit far. I read your recent blog entry and it appears quite one-sided and without all the facts or any of the specifics that have been mentioned in this thread and the one on WOTC forums.

I also noticed you had a blog post called D&D 4e’s Out… And It’s Awful. Here’s Why. It helped explain the bias in your post on Will WotC Close You Down Next?.

 

[CharlesRyan]

You know, any speculation about mxyzplk's agenda aside, he's basically correct. A fan site built around a company's (or individual's) IP absolutely exists at the IP owner's pleasure, unless it is very, very careful about its content.

Does that mean WotC is going to shut down ENWorld? Why would it? ENWorld's relationship to the D&D brand is positive and both sides benefit. So long as that remains the case, why would WotC take draconian steps?

It seems (and I have no direct experience) that Ema overstepped the appropriate bounds of his relationship with D&D. WotC acted in a manner that seems (again, no direct experience) pretty appropriate. Nothing that has happened indicates any sort of sea change in WotC policy.

Yes, WotC could almost certainly shut down ENWorld if it suddenly got the urge. If you don't like that, there's a simple way to avoid it happening: Continue to support ENWorld as the cordial, welcoming, non-IP-abusing site it's always been. I don't think WotC's ever going to come after ENWorld unless given a very, very compelling reason.

 

[billd91]

Do you have a patent for these features? In general, software features aren't covered by copyright law. WotC is allowed to use your ideas without compensating you, just as you are allowed to use the idea of a character defined by his STR, CON, DEX, INT, WIS, and CHA scores without compensating them.

I believe it is a lot more complicated than that. I am not a lawyer, but I do work in the software industry and occasionally have to visit customers who have some software in place from our competitors as well. We have to be quite careful about how ideas, that may be present and even unpatentable in competing software, appear in our software and so have to be careful about how any exposure of our employees to competitor software is handled. Lawsuits do fly over such issues and can be quite costly just to defend against even if you win in the end.
Of course, they're also expensive to pursue in the first place and so, even if HeroForge or any other fan-based or hobbyist thought they had a good case, a major corporation like Hasbro/WotC is extremely hard to achieve satisfaction against.

 

[alleynbard]

I added the bold.

Whether the images were meant to stay in-house doesn't matter. (And, IMO, a claim in this regard would actually be taken unfavorably. If I were a judge such a statement would draw my ire.) This was a blatant use, something that developers are coached strongly to not do, and the sort of use that create liabilities and gets people fired.

In WotC's defense, I cannot imagine that they do not have a proactive program to educate their employees, and I cannot imagine that they do not react swiftly to any such problems to remedy them. Can you imaging the harm if they had to pull one of the 4E books because they used someone's art without permission?

I agree. I work as a graphic designer and I really think using those images was certainly unwise. It wouldn't have been hard to develop placeholder images.

I imagine the designer utilized the images and didn't tell anyone they were from Fantasy Grounds, in the hopes he/she would replace them before any images went public. Or, the designer simply forgot where they got the image and let the thing get out. Either way, Fantasy Grounds was well within their rights to send a C&D and the designer was wrong for not simply designing his own image to begin with.

But I don't think there was any intentional IP violations on Wizards' part. That would boggle the mind and it was the point I was making. Admittedly, I was a bit vague about that.