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

takasi said:
I pointed that out to them. Here is their response:

"For the record, Kleenex is also not a generic term—it's a registered trademark. While the general public often uses the term incorrectly, you won't find anyone other than Kimberly-Clark marketing their facial tissues with the word Kleenex."

Yes, and that's why I used them as examples. They, like Adventure Path, are not generic terms.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Cadfan said:
Trademark is based on a "first use in commerce" system.

I see two likely possibilities. There are more, but I think these are the most likely.

The first is that Paizo contracted to sell WOTC the rights to publish "Adventure Path" products in Dungeon magazine. In that case Paizo has rights to the trademark, unless contracts specifically say otherwise.

The second is that Paizo had a general contract to publish Dungeon and Dragon magazines, and WOTC had a clause in the contract giving them ownership of EVERYTHING that appeared in it. This would give WOTC the trademark rights to "Adventure Path."

The way stuff gets done in the real world suggests that number 2 is how things went down. I think its more likely that there was a half assed contract with a lot of generic clauses giving WOTC rights to everything in Dungeon Magazine, including all intellectual property.

This is especially likely if Adventure Path was invented as a term after the contract was signed, because then you'd be delving into non compete issues. The usual rule is that if I contract to publish a magazine for you on, say, fishing, I don't get to go do fishing article related activities outside of my job at the magazine. Any fishing article related stuff I come up with will be your property. This is to stop contracted companies and persons from running side projects that pay them directly.

The real way this will get resolved is on a "does WOTC care?" basis. If they don't, Paizo will get the term. If they do, there will be a showdown, and we'll find out what the contracts really say.

Excellent analysis! Probably both Paizo and WotC will use the term and unless one of them raises a fuss about it, I don't think the issue will ever be contested. WotC probably doesn't care (unless Paizo tries to stake exclusive claim) and Paizo probably won't want to get into a drawn out legal fight that could bankrupt them.

What would be interesting is to see a smaller publisher intentionally use the term on a product. Not likely since why attract legal trouble just to attract it. But that would force the issue and both sides might feel compelled to respond.
 

Aloïsius said:
How were called the 3e modules, starting with The Sunless citadel ?
Amazon.com said:
Book Description
Evil grows beneath the earth

Why should anyone travel the cracked cobblestones of the Old Road? The fortress that once cast its shadow across the road does so no longer -- some whisper that the earth swallowed the fortress whole in an age long past. Four brave adventurers resolved to discover the truth and set off down the Old Road, but they never returned.

The Sunless Citadel is the first in a series of eight stand-alone adventures for the Dungeons & Dragons game. This carefully crafted adventure, designed to challenge 1st-level D&D heroes, follows a path to a mysterious dungeon where evil has taken root, and a terrible tree and its dark shepherd plot in darkness.

To use this adventure, a Dungeon Master also needs the Player's Handbook, the Dungeon Master's Guide, and the Monster Manual.
I fail to see where this is described as an "adventure path" or a "path of adventures" or anything that has to do with the words "adventure" and "path" joined somehow. Same is true with all the rest in that "series of stand-alone adventures" (as described by The Speaker of Dreams or "collection of adventures" according to Bastion of Broken Souls)

Adventure Path is their term.
 

takasi said:
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.
Maybe I'm getting too old, but I find it hard to accept that a product marketing term they started using only 4 years ago is on the same level as a "sacred cow" as some things like the Great Wheel cosmology. Fans started using it only a couple years before they did. It's not like it's a deep part of the D&D history as some of the other "sacred cows" are. I'm tempted to quote Princess Bride here ("That word doesn't mean what you think it means...") but I guess opinions vary on what is and isn't important. :)

Personally, it's just a phrase to me and doesn't affect my gaming or my purchasing either way. Dungeon Master is a registered trademark, but I don't see WotC coming after consumers for using saying "the latest product from Publisher X is great for DMs!". Yeah, publishers avoid it, but not consumers. I don't see Paizo cracking down on an individual if they say in a review "the new adventure path from Publisher X is really cool!".

As for preventing other publishers from using the term, it may be in their best interest as a business to do that. EN Publishing has their Campaign Saga (very cool, go buy it, shameless plug). I don't think it's crippling to their marketing to call it a "campaign saga" rather than an "adventure path". In fact, somewhere on these boards is a thread where Ryan Nock asked for ideas for that term. Plenty got thrown around, so it's not like there is no way you can refer to a series of adventures by any other terms.

They are not taking a patent out on the idea of a linked series of adventures starting at level 1 and ending at level 20 (or 15 or whichever). It's just a trademark on that specific phrase. Nothing prevents other publishers, including WotC, from publishing adventure paths/campaign sagas/etc. So you won't lose those at all. That's a non-issue.

Ultimately, it seems to Paizo that it's in their best interests as a business to trademark the phrase. Since I love their products, it's in my interest that they remain profitable and flourish as a business. Therefore, I support them in this. :)
 

dmccoy1693 said:
Yes, and that's why I used them as examples. They, like Adventure Path, are not generic terms.

But they are misused. That's the point. The industry, including us as customers, would be better off using a separate term. However, we've adopted Adventure Path before the trademark has been registered. I think it would be better now if we could keep it (both publishers and consumers).
 

dmccoy1693 said:
Starting to act like the man?!? YMMV, but from where I sit it sounds like the underdog trying to prevent the 900 lb guerrilla from taking its stuff.

When the thing being taken by the gorilla is the gorilla's property because you made an agreement that everything you made that appeared in the pages of Gorilla or Gorilla Nest magazines belonged exclusively to the gorilla, it's just the gorilla taking back what belongs to it.

Also, a 900 pound guerrilla would be terribly ineffective at both hiding and hit and run tactics.

-TRRW
 

kenmarable said:
It's not like it's a deep part of the D&D history as some of the other "sacred cows" are.

It's sacred to Dungeon Magazine at this point I would think. Something that's been taking up 36 issues, 1/4 of the entire print run, is significant.

And I love War of the Burning Sky. We're wrapping up Shelter from the Storm right now. I highly recommend it to anyone considering an adventure path.
 

The gaming community can use "adventure path" all it wants in general conversation; only if someone is using in in a public or commercial venture would Paizo likely take issue with it. Kimberly-Clark Corp doesn't go around suing people who say, "Kleenex" instead of "facial tissue," do they?
 

theredrobedwizard said:
When the thing being taken by the gorilla is the gorilla's property because you made an agreement that everything you made that appeared in the pages of Gorilla or Gorilla Nest magazines belonged exclusively to the gorilla, it's just the gorilla taking back what belongs to it.

Dragon was theirs, yes (no matter how many times I still wake up hoping that it was just a bad dream that WotC didn't renew the licence). Can you show me a single confirmed instance of where the term "Adventure Path" was used before Paizo took over Dungeon?

theredrobedwizard said:
Also, a 900 pound guerrilla would be terribly ineffective at both hiding and hit and run tactics.

Who says the guerilla needs to hide or run away. If it swats the underdog, it'll probably be in to much pain to fight back. The guerrilla can just walk over, take its stuff and meander away. Underdogs need to rely on their Dex bonus. Unfortunately, Lawyers are the Magic Missile of our world, they always hit, no save. Lawyers are capable of doing much more damage then a single use of a Magic Missile spell.
 

Henry said:
The gaming community can use "adventure path" all it wants in general conversation; only if someone is using in in a public or commercial venture would Paizo likely take issue with it. Kimberly-Clark Corp doesn't go around suing people who say, "Kleenex" instead of "facial tissue," do they?

Why confuse the community?

Why take the term away from Dungeon Magazine in the first place?

Why not support the open gaming community by giving us that term to us?
 

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top