Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sacrosanct" data-source="post: 8488552" data-attributes="member: 15700">There's a whole lot of inconsistencies here, so I'll try to keep is as clear as I can.  First is the above.  I'm not arguing about the lawsuit or what WotC is saying it; it's not relevant to what I said..  You said "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.", which is exactly what they just did for Weis and Hickman.  So that statement is demonstratably false.  when I said they weren't publishing things with the old logos, I assumed your context was new work with logos, based on what you said here:Which is why I said WotC isn't publishing their own TSR logo'd book if that was your standard.  I guess I was assuming you knew WotC was using both of those logos the same way.  As per below, I guess I was incorrect in assuming you know what you were talking about.  Honestly I should have known not to assume that by your earlier misunderstanding about how the licenses work for the OGL and DMsGuild.If POD printing of old products counts as publishing (which I would argue it does), then WotC is most assuredly still publishing Dragonlance.Wrong again.  Legacy products are on both sites.  How can you argue there would be brand confusion using the TSR old logos but not with Dragonlance, when WoTC is utilizing them both the exact same way?Weis literally said Wizards gave them permission to use the original logo.  Based on that statement, it infers that it didn't already fall under any agreement they had with Del Rey otherwise no additional permission to use it would be necessary. Despite your attempt to make this personal, you are wrong again.  I never said WoTC should give it to a "random schmuck."  I said someone with an existing portfolio of published work so WoTC could review and see if that publisher would be OK to license it out to, or "some of those old guard as contributors and creators", which as you'll note, is exactly what's happening with Weis and Hickman getting permission to use Dragonlance logos.  I guess we disagree here.  I think a thread on the first page of the forum you're posting on, with the evidence on the very first post of that thread, is not hard to find.  Nor it being on her FB profile something that was hard to find.  I mean, it was literally in front of your face when you logged on and brought this site up.   <img class="smilie smilie--emoji" alt="🤷‍♂️" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f937-2642.png" title="Man shrugging    :man_shrugging:" data-shortname=":man_shrugging:" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" /> For all intents and purposes, the original Dragonlance and TSR logos are being used the same way by WoTC: they appear on legacy content being sold on DTRPG and DMsGuildWotC has just shown they are willing to grant permission to use an old logo not currently being used on new material, but still being sold under legacy products</blockquote>

Verification