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

 

[Dioltach]

The phrase that comes to mind is "lay the smack down".

 

[qstor]

Here's the "complaint"

USPTO TTABVUE. Proceeding Number 92078589

 

[qstor]

Here's the "complaint"

USPTO TTABVUE. Proceeding Number 92078589

 

[Sacrosanct]

A point of clarity for some folks. A notice for cancellation doesn't mean WoTC is trying to cancel their claim to a trademark, or the trademark in general. The wording is a bit ambiguous. It means WoTC is filing a motion to cancel the trademark that LaNasa filed, citing reasons:

Grounds for Cancellation Priority and likelihood of confusion Trademark Act Sections 14(1) and 2(d) Fraud on the USPTO Trademark Act Section 14(3); In re Bose Corp., 580 F.3d 1240, 91 USPQ2d 1938 (Fed. Cir. 2009)

Emphasis mine. Wow. They aren't playing.

 

[qstor]

I'm surprised an attorney helped LaNasa file the registration in the first place. There's NO basis for a trademark in the TSR wizard "design"

 

[Parmandur]

Well, good.

 

[darjr]

WotC calls it like it is, fraud. So what happens when LeNasas requests are canceled in court due to fraud?

 

[adamantyr]

I'm no lawyer, but this reads like a professional wrote it. I'll be surprised if it's not granted.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

WotC calls it like it is, fraud. So what happens when LeNasas requests are canceled in court due to fraud?

Simplifying-

This isn't court, it's an administrative proceeding (the PTO's trial and appeal board). Close enough for discussion purposes.
Once WoTC wins (assuming, as it seems quite likely), then that will pretty much doom LaNasa's attempts at a declaratory action involving trademarks.
And since he never really had a copyright claim (man, that was, if possible, stupider ... or stupider-est?) that should be the end of that little bit.