PETITION: Keep the term 'Adventure Path' Open Source!

[takasi]

It's come to my attention over on the Paizo boards that they're trying to make the term 'Adventure Path' a registered trademark. Their staff is trying to prevent all publishers and even consumers from using it to describe non Paizo products.

In this thread:

http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboard...Edition/40PAIZOISSTILLUNDECIDED&page=4#307086

Erik Mona talks about how publisher support of 4th edition may kill the 3.5 OGL. He thens goes on to say that 3.5 preserves all of the "sacred cows" and praises the fact that it can't be revoked. It seems ironic that their entire business model is based on material that WotC opened up for them and now they're taking something they developed for Dungeon and keeping it to themselves.

I ask Paizo that at the bare minimum to please give back to the open gaming community what they've founded their business on. Please give us the term "Adventure Path". It's a "sacred cow" to me, as a gamer. Shackled City, Age of Worms and Savage Tide are just as much "Dungeon" as they are "Paizo". I want to see future Dungeon Adventure Paths, as well as other Adventure Paths from third party publishers.

 

[Dragonblade]

If anything I imagine that WotC owns the term since they would own lock, stock, and barrell anything that graced the pages of Dungeon.

 

[takasi]

I would have assumed the same, but Paizo staff have said otherwise:

http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboard...backForDevelopmentTeamCraftingInPathfinderAPs

 

[dmccoy1693]

I ask Paizo that at the bare minimum to please give back to the open gaming community that they've founded their business on. Please give us the term "Adventure Path". It's a "sacred cow" to me, as a gamer. Shackled City, Age of Worms and Savage Tide are just as much "Dungeon" as they are "Paizo". I want to see future Dungeon Adventure Paths, as well as other Adventure Paths from third party publishers.

Personally, I don't have a problem if Paizo wants to keep the term "Adventure Path" exclusively theirs. Wizards can come up with their own term for it (Adventure Series, Hall of Adventures, Adventure Story, etc). Why can't Paizo have some brand names all their own? Its not like the concept of a series of adventures strung together is copyrightable.

EDIT: Its not like Wizards hasn't come up with some GREAT names recently

 

[takasi]

Why can't Paizo have some brand names all their own?

They have Pathfinder and Gamemastery, neither of which are embedded into the soul of Dungeon magazine now.

(And ironically, Pathfinder was announced right around the time the Pathfinder movie came out. I'm sure that confused more than a few retailers.)

 

[Ourph]

I fully support Paizo taking the term "Adventure Path" as a trademark for their work. IMO it would be more confusing than helpful if other companies started using the exact same term to describe a series of linked adventures. Paizo developed all of the original "Adventure Paths", it makes sense that they would want to keep that name associated with their products for future use.

BTW - Why is this thread in the 4e section? Shouldn't it be in General?

 

[Dragonblade]

I would have assumed the same, but Paizo staff have said otherwise:

http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboard...backForDevelopmentTeamCraftingInPathfinderAPs

I guarantee that WotC would have a clear legal claim to it, so unless WotC specifically signed off on that, they are wrong. Besides WotC has already referred to their upcoming free SW Saga adventure as an Adventure Path.

I don't see that this is a battle that Paizo should be fighting at this point. Pissing off WotC prior to the release of the 4e SRD is not a good idea. And part of the anti-4e grognard base will turn on them if they think Paizo is starting to act like "the man".

 

[GMSkarka]

As a publisher, I have no problems with this. It's not as if we can't release similarly-structured products under another name.

For example, we produced an "Adventure Path" for THRILLING TALES -- but we called it a "Serial Adventure."

Paizo is wanting to use a term that they coined. They're not saying that multi-part arc adventure series are exclusively theirs....only that their name for them is. Good for them.

 

[takasi]

BTW - Why is this thread in the 4e section? Shouldn't it be in General?

I thought I had posted it in general originally, then it disappeared and is now in the 4th edition category. Did a mod move it?

It's not confusing. It's a term near and dear to Dungeon Magazine now, at least to me. The sequel to Savage Tide should come from Dungeon, and it should have the name "Adventure Path", IMO.

 

[dmccoy1693]

... embedded into the soul of Dungeon magazine now.

I would agree with you if "Adventure Path" was term before Paizo took over Dungeon. But it's a term they and they alone coined. There's nothing stopping WotC from doing the exact same thing and calling it an Adventure Story. Why does Paizo have to surrender the rights to their term as well?