Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Iosue" data-source="post: 9189202" data-attributes="member: 6680772">Holmes Basic, with Arneson’s name on it, predated any lawsuits. It was in fact the cause of the first lawsuit, because TSR wanted to only pay royalties on the rulebook, and not on the box set.This lawsuit was settled without going to judgment. Arneson then sued over the Monster Manual, arguing that it was part of the D&amp;D game. This was also settled, with Arneson getting royalties on the MM, but giving up claims to the rest of the AD&amp;D line. This led to another lawsuit, when Arneson claimed royalties on Monster Manual II, arguing that it was a revision of the original Monster Manual. I believe this is the only suit to go to judgment, in Arneson’s favor.It is my understanding that the split lines was less about keeping Arneson away from AD&amp;D royalties (which the settlements already did), but because Holmes Basic sold far more than expected, so they decided to cash in on that audience. After all, if it’s just about keeping Arneson away from AD&amp;D, then there’s no need to go beyond B/X, let alone the Mentzer redress, Companion, Master, Immortals, and Gazetteers. That’s purely from the Basic Set being TSR’s top seller from about 1980 to 1984.As for WotC and Arneson, Arneson’s original contract with TSR was that he got half the royalties of “the game or game rules called Dungeons &amp; Dragons.” Adkinson wanted to remove the “Advanced” from 3rd Edition. To do that and not owe Arneson (and Gygax) royalties, he had to buy out their contracts.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Iosue, post: 9189202, member: 6680772"] Holmes Basic, with Arneson’s name on it, predated any lawsuits. It was in fact the cause of the first lawsuit, because TSR wanted to only pay royalties on the rulebook, and not on the box set. This lawsuit was settled without going to judgment. Arneson then sued over the Monster Manual, arguing that it was part of the D&D game. This was also settled, with Arneson getting royalties on the MM, but giving up claims to the rest of the AD&D line. This led to another lawsuit, when Arneson claimed royalties on Monster Manual II, arguing that it was a revision of the original Monster Manual. I believe this is the only suit to go to judgment, in Arneson’s favor. It is my understanding that the split lines was less about keeping Arneson away from AD&D royalties (which the settlements already did), but because Holmes Basic sold far more than expected, so they decided to cash in on that audience. After all, if it’s just about keeping Arneson away from AD&D, then there’s no need to go beyond B/X, let alone the Mentzer redress, Companion, Master, Immortals, and Gazetteers. That’s purely from the Basic Set being TSR’s top seller from about 1980 to 1984. As for WotC and Arneson, Arneson’s original contract with TSR was that he got half the royalties of “the game or game rules called Dungeons & Dragons.” Adkinson wanted to remove the “Advanced” from 3rd Edition. To do that and not owe Arneson (and Gygax) royalties, he had to buy out their contracts. [/QUOTE]

Verification