TSR Now it’s WotC’s Turn: WotC Moves Against TSR3

I guess after you provoke somebody enough, they’ll eventually bite back. The company has begun trademark cancellation procedures against the newest TSR.

TSR3 briefly filed for a court declaration on Dec 7th as to their ownership of the TSR trademarks — with an IndieGoGo campaign to fund it — and then voluntarily dismissed it a couple of days later on Dec 9th.

This filing is dated Dec 6th, the day before TSR3 launched its campaign.

In WotC’s response, they cite fraud as one of the causes of action, alleging that TSR3 misled the trademark office in its original application.

Mike Dunford, on Twitter, breaks down the action.

TSR - TSR3.5 Voluntarily Dismisses Lawsuit

A lawsuit filed by TSR3 against D&D owners Wizards of the Coast a few days ago was voluntarily dismissed. Dismissal without prejudice means that the suit can be filed again. The suit lasted two days from the 7th to the 9th of December. The IndieGoGo fundraiser to fund it is still running...

www.enworld.org

TSR - TSR3.5 Launches IndieGogo Campaign to "Stop" WotC

The latest in the TSR3 saga, which has gone quiet for a while, is a new IndieGoGo campaign launched to "stop Wizards of the Coast". They cite wrongful bullying of TSR, and refusal to answer requests that WotC show TSR "proof of their claims" (although the campaign page doesn't mention what those...

www.enworld.org

 

[Sacrosanct]

I mean, is the trademark actually worth anything at this point? I suggest that they won’t actually be losing anything. They’ve ground the brand into the dust. Nobody would touch it with a bargepole.

Nobody other than WotC, who will still sell the classic pdf titles using it, if only because taking the brand images off the pdfs would be a pain.

If they really wanted to, for the 50th, they could put out a line of classic style modules, by old-hand designers, under that brand, and it'd probably sell really well.

I still think it can be salvaged. Then again, I'm an eternal optimist when it comes to things I have nostalgia for. I would love for someone to propose to WotC, "Hey, can I license the use of the TSR logos? You can review the products for approval to ensure it aligns with the company's vision while capturing the nostalgia, aesthetics, and gameplay of early D&D without the problematic areas, hiring some of those old guard as contributors and creators." There are lots of OSR grognards like myself who are fully on board with the direction D&D has gone in the context of inclusion and diversity. We're not all like Pundit, Venger, or LaNasa. Inclusion and old school D&D are not mutually exclusive.

Heck, I'd love to do such a rebranding project myself, but I doubt I have the funds to meet what WotC would ask for even if they were interested.

 

[dirtypool]

View attachment 148321Everything is possible in this the best of all possible worlds.

Looks more like Jim J. Bullock or an aged up Will Forte

 

[Umbran]

I still think it can be salvaged. Then again, I'm an eternal optimist when it comes to things I have nostalgia for. I would love for someone to propose to WotC, "Hey, can I license the use of the TSR logos? You can review the products for approval to ensure it aligns with the company's vision while capturing the nostalgia, aesthetics, and gameplay of early D&D without the problematic areas, hiring some of those old guard as contributors and creators."

The thing in the way of that vision is that WotC has no need to license it out to someone else to do this. They can do it all on their own.

 

[Sacrosanct]

The thing in the way of that vision is that WotC has no need to license it out to someone else to do this. They can do it all on their own.

true. the only selling point is more profit for them for no additional work or hiring costs on their end. This would be such a tiny % of revenue though, it wouldn't even be a blip on their radar though, I suspect.

 

[Umbran]

true. the only selling point is more profit for them for no additional work

Incorrect - they'd have to have editorial review and such.

 

[dirtypool]

There's also a zero chance they would not license the work or pay the author in some way. Accepting free work from an author is a recipe for a legal battle if the work is successful.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Incorrect - they'd have to have editorial review and such.

spending an hour to review a product to ensure it's not including anything problematic is much different than hiring freelancers or using full staff to write and design the product. Heck, they wouldn't even have to to that. They could license out to someone who already has a portfolio, and see if any of that portfolio work has any issues before licensing. I.e., they could look at publishers like Pundit, Venger, LaNasa and clearly see how they wouldn't align with current WotC vision, and look at others (start with the red companies on that infamous list lol) and have more comfort in just doing a license and that's it; no more work on their side.

There's also a zero chance they would not license the work or pay the author in some way. Accepting free work from an author is a recipe for a legal battle if the work is successful.

Companies license out IP all the time without paying those users of the license. It's the other way around. They're doing it right now. When you use DM's Guild (or the OGL in general), you are using a license. DMsGuild gives them a cut IIRC (but I could be mistaken). They aren't paying the creators extra to put their licensed material on DMsGuild, they are taking a cut from it.

The TSR logos aren't really being used by WoTC outside of DMsGuild and DTRPG for legacy products. It's not that unreasonable for them to license out the logos to others since they've already shown they are amicable ot licenses, and it would be an extra cut to them without them having to do any extra work, just like DMsGuild does now. Just determine the terms for the license.

 

[dirtypool]

spending an hour to review a product to ensure it's not including anything problematic is much different than hiring freelancers or using full staff to write and design the product.

Yeah, an hour of work isn't how product reviews work in the industry, and you know that.

Companies license out IP all the time without paying those users of the license.

Hence my statement that they would either license the material (put you under a contract which would require them to pay lawyers) or pay the author. This was in reference to your statement that there would be no additional cost to WOTC, I presented two possible costs, either a legal fee or a direct payment. I didn't even get into the simple stuff like promotional costs.

It's the other way around. They're doing it right now. When you use DM's Guild (or the OGL in general), you are using a license. DMsGuild gives them a cut IIRC (but I could be mistaken). They aren't paying the creators extra to put their licensed material on DMsGuild, they are taking a cut from it.

The DM's Guild is a usage of the OGL which is a fair use license that excludes D&D specific content. There is zero quality control on the DM's Guild and while it is a great tool to democratize access to content, it is not built for high quality revision to existing materials Were you revising existing D&D Material for re-release they would enter into a separate license with you. You would be treated like a 3PP and not at all like an independent entity selling their homebrew content in the established homebrew marketplace.

The TSR logos aren't really being used by WoTC outside of DMsGuild and DTRPG for legacy products. It's not that unreasonable for them to license out the logos to others since they've already shown they are amicable ot licenses, and it would be an extra cut to them without them having to do any extra work, just like DMsGuild does now. Just determine the terms for the license.

It would absolutely be unreasonable to license out the logos that they use as trade dress, because it would create brand confusion over which entity is the creator and publisher of official content. That's the whole point of trademarks. It's a strange thing to suggest in the article about WOTC protecting their trademark that what they really should do is weaken it instead.

 

[Umbran]

spending an hour to review a product to ensure it's not including anything problematic is much different than hiring freelancers or using full staff to write and design the product.

I don't expect Hasbro/WotC would find "an hour" to review. They'd have a very specific interest in the quality of the product, as it would bear their trademark, so review would likely not limited to just looking for language use.

This is not to say that licensing it out would not be cheaper, but it may not be cheaper enough to justify doing it that way.

 

[Staffan]

The DM's Guild is a usage of the OGL which is a fair use license that excludes D&D specific content.

No, it's not. The DM's Guild is completely separate from the OGL, and you can't use material licensed under the OGL in things published via the DM's Guild.