If Wizards of the Coast went out of business

[Ranger REG]

Both D&D and the d20 logo are the property of Wizards.

But other than having an iron-fisted stipulation clause in their licensing agreement to publish/circulate two official D&D magazines, or having had prior violation/breach of the royalty-free d20 System Trademark License, I don't see how WotC would prevent Paizo from publishing their own d20 products.

You can make OGL products without problem - it's just the branding that is problematic.

The D&D brand, yes.

But the d20 System brand? Did WotC finally revoked the royalty-free trademark license?

 

[delericho]

If WotC were to disappear, one of two things would happen. Either Hasbro would license the D&D name (possibly just for tabletop role-playing products) to someone, who would then take over, or they would sit on the trademark, and the D&D RPG would cease to exist in any meaningful manner.

As D&D goes, so goes the whole of the tabletop role-playing genre - if Hasbro didn't license it, RPGs as we know them would wither and die.

Furthermore, it is almost certainly the case that Wizards own all rights to Eberron and Forgotten Realms, and that if WotC disappears these rights revert to Hasbro (and not to the original creators). As with D&D itself, any continuation of these worlds would rely on licensing.

 

[MerricB]

But other than having an iron-fisted stipulation clause in their licensing agreement to publish/circulate two official D&D magazines, or having had prior violation/breach of the royalty-free d20 System Trademark License, I don't see how WotC would prevent Paizo from publishing their own d20 products.

If Wizards goes down, so does the license to use the d20 System logo. They can revoke it or change the license at any time; it isn't the same as the perpetual OGL.

Cheers!

 

[Sammael]

As D&D goes, so goes the whole of the tabletop role-playing genre - if Hasbro didn't license it, RPGs as we know them would wither and die.

I think you're giving D&D too much credit for being the driving force behind RPGs. I can tell you for a fact that this is not the case in many European countries, where D&D is generally shunned and other systems - often locally-designed ones - are played a lot more.

For one, I think Palladium Fantasy would pick up some sales, as it is probably the best-known system which has strong similarities to D&D. Not that I would like that to happen, but all other major systems (WoD, GURPS) are too different in approach to be recognized as a successor.

 

[MerricB]

I think you're giving D&D too much credit for being the driving force behind RPGs. I can tell you for a fact that this is not the case in many European countries, where D&D is generally shunned and other systems - often locally-designed ones - are played a lot more.

For one, I think Palladium Fantasy would pick up some sales, as it is probably the best-known system which has strong similarities to D&D. Not that I would like that to happen, but all other major systems (WoD, GURPS) are too different in approach to be recognized as a successor.

Within the US, without D&D, there wouldn't be much of a RPG market.

Palladium wouldn't have a chance, especially given its current state... It's more likely that a game like C&C could fill the void.

Cheers!

 

[Mouseferatu]

Keith should be the only one who would be directing Eberron's future of WotC goes into bankruptcy. I'd rather have the settings fall into the hands of the original creators than into the hands of others. Provided that the Copyrights are set up that way.

It's a nice thought, but I'm afraid that it's utterly not the case.

WotC owns Eberron, pure and simple. Keith may have helped create it, but he has no more legal right to it, or any of its content, than you do. If WotC or Hasbro chose to sell the brand, they could do so. If they do not do so, then only WotC can ever publish anything using the Eberron intellectual property.

If WotC were to go out of business, and chose not to sell Eberron in the process, then there would be no more Eberron product, pure and simple.

 

[amethal]

Either D&D is worth something, in which case Hasbro will sell it.

Or it isn't, in which case Hasbro won't bother sueing people over it.

Either way, I have enough D&D stuff for the rest of the century.

 

[Vigilance]

Presumably, the D&D brand is worth money.

Somebody would pick it up from Hasbro, and provide some sort of "official" D&D products.

Paizo is (presumably) making money from Dragon and Dungeon, and would relish the opportunity to free themselves from the need to get WotC permission for most of their activities. If the price dropped low enough I am sure they would take on the D&D brand.

Except that Hasbro is a company almost legendary for their willingness to sit on IP, whether or not they have any plans for it or not.

Don't get me wrong, I think that's smart, but I think Hasbro knows good IP when they see it and are as likely to sell the D&D brand as they are GI Joe. Which is to say, not at all.

Even if WOTC went out of business, why does that mean selling D&D is a good idea. Because it would please us?

Hasbro is the type of company that would happily sit on that brand for 10 years until someone came along with the right idea for a comic book or Saturday morning cartoon or Basic D&D type game with strong board game elements or something.

Good IP is always worth holding onto.

 

[Nightfall]

If Wizards goes down, so does the license to use the d20 System logo. They can revoke it or change the license at any time; it isn't the same as the perpetual OGL.

Cheers!

En World optimist got replaced by a pod person! Who are you and what happened to the real Merric?!

 

[Ranger REG]

If Wizards goes down, so does the license to use the d20 System logo. They can revoke it or change the license at any time; it isn't the same as the perpetual OGL.

Cheers!

Oh, I know that. Amethal's statement about Paizo relishing the opportunity to free themselves from WotC's quality control concerns me in the present days.