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

[Kid Charlemagne]

I don't know if WoTC would necessarily have legal claim to "Adventure Path." In any case, I completely emphathize with Paizo wanting to own the term. Its a valuable term, and they did invent it, after all.

 

[takasi]

I would agree with you if "Adventure Path" was term before Paizo took over Dungeon. But it was something they and they alone implimented. 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?

I'm not saying they're not allowed to keep the term. That's a legal question that I can't answer. But I'm asking why should they persue it? Why not contribute to the community?

 

[Dragonblade]

I don't know if WoTC would necessarily have legal claim to "Adventure Path." In any case, I completely emphathize with Paizo wanting to own the term. Its a valuable term, and they did invent it, after all.

I'd be very surprised if their contract with WotC to publish Dragon and Dungeon did not give WotC rights to anything Paizo created and published in those magazines. Very surprised indeed.

 

[dmccoy1693]

And part of the anti-4e grognard base will turn on them if they think Paizo is starting to act like "the man".

Starting to act like the man?!? YMMV, but from where I sit it sounds like the underdog trying to prevent the 900 lb guerilla from taking its stuff.

 

[grimslade]

It's going to be real tough for Paizo to claim Adventure Path since WotC used it before Paizo was created.
The original Adventure path was the series of linked mods at the start of 3E, i.e. The Sunless Citadel, Forge of Fury.
I really don't understand where they are going with this.

Linky:
http://www.amazon.com/D-Adventure-Path/lm/39CTXE22HRB6H

Edit: The phrase does not appear on the items themselves but it was used here and other forums during the release of the series. Paizo might have more of a leg to stand on, but WotC still owns Dungeon. It is a common phrase I like what Paizo does but TMing Adventure Path just seems like a legal battle they can't win.

 

[dmccoy1693]

What have they contributed? Anything?

Do they have to? Mind you, I never thought to look until now (and I'm not at home right now so I can't look) but I don't remember seeing a d20 logo on any of their post-Dungeon/Dragon products. I notice that they make sure to put "(OGL)" after all their products. If it is only OGL and not d20, they can declare anything that isn't previously OGL as IP. Good for them if they do declare "Adventure Path" as IP.

 

[Dragonblade]

Starting to act like the man?!? YMMV, but from where I sit it sounds like the underdog trying to prevent the 900 lb guerilla from taking its stuff.

As long as its framed as Paizo vs. WotC, they get support. When it gets framed as Paizo vs. small publishers, then they are the gorilla and they will lose a little support.

 

[am181d]

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 wouldn't be so sure about that. Intellectual Property law is a lot more complicated than that. The easiest analogy I can think of is when a talk show host (say David Letterman or Craig Killbourne) leave their talk show. Some gimmicks they get to take with them. Some they don't. There are a lot of variables involved, including who thought up what, where and when it was thought up, and what agreements the parties might have come to at the dissolution of their relationship.

You may be right. You may be wrong. I for one wouldn't be so sure either way.

 

[takasi]

It's going to be real tough for Paizo to claim Adventure Path since WotC used it before Paizo was created.
The original Adventure path was the series of linked mods at the start of 3E, i.e. The Sunless Citadel, Forge of Fury.
I really don't understand where they are going with this.

Linky:
http://www.amazon.com/D-Adventure-Path/lm/39CTXE22HRB6H

To be fair, that link is to a List made by a fan, not the use of the term by WotC.

I just think it's unfair to the rest of the community. It looks like EN World was going to use the term for Burning Sky. And it's a term that as a consumer I can use to differentiate a series of adventures that are somewhat related to one that connects strongly with DMs wanting to run players from 1st to x, from start of the campaign to the finish.

 

[Shroomy]

Aren't all the new monsters that appear in Pathfinder and Gamemastery open content? I thought they were (along with some of the magic items).