Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
Publishing Business & Licensing
Hello, I am lawyer with a PSA: almost everyone is wrong about the OGL and SRD. Clearing up confusion.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Steel_Wind" data-source="post: 8885767" data-attributes="member: 20741"><p>Well, the old addage is that plaintiffs run <strong>TO</strong> the courtroom; defendants run away <strong>FROM</strong> the courtroom. That much is true; however, it can change depending on.</p><p></p><p>What WotC would want is to run TO the courtroom to obtain an injunction -- WIN -- and then RUN AWAY from the courtroom to delay the ultimate hearing on the merits so that the underlying injunctive remedy (which it has already received the benefit of) is not displaced or otherwise undone. As a term of obtaining an injunction, most jurisdictions require that the party seeking the injunction gives an undertaking in damages, too. So ultimately, if the injunction was wrongly granted, the party that obtained the injunction is writing a cheque for damages to the other side, even if they win the underlying case. That's another reason why you don't want the ultimate hearing on the merits.</p><p></p><p>Injunctions turn upon the unique facts of each case. As I indicated earlier in this thread, I am highly skeptical that WotC could obtain an injunction under the 1.0a OGL based on some revision to the OGL in 1.1, as it is unlikely to meet the 3 part test for an injunction. The test was set down by the House of Lords in <em>American Cyanamid Co. v. Ethicon Ltd.</em>, [1975] l All E.R. 504 and is the law which is followed in all common law jurisdictions, including the United States, though there is variation as to when it applies and WHAT it applies to between jurisdictions.</p><p></p><p>The injunction test requires the moving party who seeks injunctive relief to prove on a balance or probabilities:</p><p></p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">it appears to have a strong case and a <em>prima facie</em> right to the relief in dispute;</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">it would suffer <em>irreparable harm</em> were the injunction not granted; and</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">the balance of convenience favours granting the injunction.</li> </ul><p></p><p>While every injunction case turns upon its own specific facts, I do not think based on what we have seen so far that WotC would get an injunction under the OGL 1.0a.... but PLEASE take that well-salted. This stuff is <em>highly fact dependent</em> and every case is different. Trying to moot something like this absent facts is not terribly helpful - or an accurate projection, okay?</p><p></p><p>Anyway, if WotC DID get an injunction, after that, they would seek to delay any ultimate hearing on the merits. Those would be the typical circumstances that reverses the addage of who runs to the courtroom and who runs away from it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Steel_Wind, post: 8885767, member: 20741"] Well, the old addage is that plaintiffs run [B]TO[/B] the courtroom; defendants run away [B]FROM[/B] the courtroom. That much is true; however, it can change depending on. What WotC would want is to run TO the courtroom to obtain an injunction -- WIN -- and then RUN AWAY from the courtroom to delay the ultimate hearing on the merits so that the underlying injunctive remedy (which it has already received the benefit of) is not displaced or otherwise undone. As a term of obtaining an injunction, most jurisdictions require that the party seeking the injunction gives an undertaking in damages, too. So ultimately, if the injunction was wrongly granted, the party that obtained the injunction is writing a cheque for damages to the other side, even if they win the underlying case. That's another reason why you don't want the ultimate hearing on the merits. Injunctions turn upon the unique facts of each case. As I indicated earlier in this thread, I am highly skeptical that WotC could obtain an injunction under the 1.0a OGL based on some revision to the OGL in 1.1, as it is unlikely to meet the 3 part test for an injunction. The test was set down by the House of Lords in [I]American Cyanamid Co. v. Ethicon Ltd.[/I], [1975] l All E.R. 504 and is the law which is followed in all common law jurisdictions, including the United States, though there is variation as to when it applies and WHAT it applies to between jurisdictions. The injunction test requires the moving party who seeks injunctive relief to prove on a balance or probabilities: [LIST] [*]it appears to have a strong case and a [I]prima facie[/I] right to the relief in dispute; [*]it would suffer [I]irreparable harm[/I] were the injunction not granted; and [*]the balance of convenience favours granting the injunction. [/LIST] While every injunction case turns upon its own specific facts, I do not think based on what we have seen so far that WotC would get an injunction under the OGL 1.0a.... but PLEASE take that well-salted. This stuff is [I]highly fact dependent[/I] and every case is different. Trying to moot something like this absent facts is not terribly helpful - or an accurate projection, okay? Anyway, if WotC DID get an injunction, after that, they would seek to delay any ultimate hearing on the merits. Those would be the typical circumstances that reverses the addage of who runs to the courtroom and who runs away from it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
Publishing Business & Licensing
Hello, I am lawyer with a PSA: almost everyone is wrong about the OGL and SRD. Clearing up confusion.
Top