Third Party Character Creation iOS App Removed

The d20 Fight Club for D&D 5th Edition iOS app has been removed from the Apple App Store by its creator at the request of WotC. The creator reports that he received a Cease & Desist demand (although it's worth noting that some supposed recent C&Ds appear to have turned out to be amicable requests). This follows on from the removal of the D&D Tools website and the more recent online character generator.

The creator reports that "I received a cease and desist order from Wizards of the Coast. All D&D apps will be removed from the App Store as they weren't compliant with WotC's copyrights and trademarks. Hopefully they'll be back in some form someday. Til then, thanks for all the support."

Nobody has actually shared one of these C&Ds yet, and others have indicated that what they actually received was simply a friendly email asking that they respect WotC's trademarks, so it's not entirely clear what is happening. Hopefully somebody will share one soon!

It does look like this particular app contained text and stat blocks copied directly from the D&D books. Below is the DM version of the app (the companion to the character creation app).

​

 

[Dausuul]

Legal and ethical are not the same thing.

D&D is a system supported by fans. You piss your fans off, your product takes a dive. We don't need it to get to work. We don't need it to fill our bellies. But they do need us to make money.

WotC has every right, ethical as well as legal, to defend its copyright. Whether it helps or hurts them financially is not relevant to whether it's ethical (unless you want to argue about Hasbro's fiduciary duty to shareholders)

And frankly, I don't believe it does hurt them financially. The vast majority of D&D players have no clue any of this is going on, and probably wouldn't care if they did.

 

[turkeygiant]

The problem is with american trademark law. If you don't defend your trademark, you risk loosing it. It's called failure to police. For WOTC, the risk is simply not worth it compared to sending a simple cease & desist.

This is very much true, but there actually is a very slim risk of losing a trademark (read that as all but impossible) because of failure to police under the current legislation. But for a company like WotC/Hasbro who probably has a in house legal department it is literally so insignificant for them to send a C&D letter that there is no reason not to do it just to be safe.

I agree that it sucks that they don't have a character creator out there, and that they are shutting down the 3rd party options that are filling those gaps. But they do intend to release their own at some point or at least set up a license, and I completely understand why as a business they would flex their legal rights to ensure that the way is clear of completion when they finally do release something.

If I were them however I would try to strike a middle ground for the sake of community good will, as long as an app is free to use, not generating ad revenue, and generic enough in its ability/spell descriptions not to render the physical PHB unnecessary leave them be until you get you own official product on the market.

 

[Jester David]

Hell yeah I would. When I create something, I want some sort of element of control over it, and I sure as heck don't want someone releasing something using my IP to create slashfic, or to implement things like racism or any number of things I wouldn't approve of. Especially if there could be confusion from customers as to what my product is all about. I.e., if I create a game (which I have), I don't want people putting out a video game where part of it glorifies killing kids or endorses sexism. And yes, I've actually had people solicit approval for video games in the past using my creations.

The video game example raised was likely a poor analogy as video games have to have their own content, while this is a companion app. A better example might be an unauthorized encyclopedia. Something copying your IP and representing the information in an easier to consume yet incomplete fashion.

 

[Iosue]

To me, it seems telling that they appear to be targeting character generators. Not any of the other myriad 5e-derived material out there, like the encounter calculators, or character sheets, or original material (subclasses, backgrounds, etc.).

WOTC already declared their lack of intention to release their own tool when they canceled their licensed tool.

Well, that's ridiculous. WotC declared their lack of intention to release the tool that Dungeonscape was working on. Canceling it hardly means they have no intention of releasing their own tool through other developers.

Not long ago, Obsidian was pooh-poohing WotC for not knowing what it was doing with its licensing and people were saying, "Yeah! They haven't announced a thing!" The low-and-behold, there was a big announcement about a new D&D video game, surprising everyone. WotC plays their cards close to their chest. Just because they aren't saying anything doesn't mean they don't have plans in the works.

 

[fantasmamore]

It doesn't give that person a right, but how does it harm the company if they have no competing product to offer?

Well, first of all, they may, someday, create their own character generator. Why would they want to have competition on their own product?
Then, there is the aesthetics (graphics) part. The "Rise of Tiamat" and "Hoard of the Dragon Queen", even the Spell Cards were designed to have the same aesthetic result as the three core books. The logo is always the same, the background, art, fonts etc. So, when I buy one of these products I am in a familiar environment that I identify as "D&D". Most customers will not be able to understand that they are made from other companies. So, why is this important? Because when I buy a product for D&D, I expect a certain quality, a specific presentation. By not letting anyone use my IP I have control over a lot of things.
That said, I am 100% with you. They must create a character generator program, they have to release an OGL and let the community create amazing things, maybe with a sepcific "5e compatible" logo. There is demand, obviously...

 

[Paraxis]

I like the art style, anyone know who did the picture of the dwarf?

 

[Icon_Charlie]

There is a right way and a wrong way when dealing with your customer base.

I've been dealing with multinationals in my sphere of influence. you NEVER piss off your customer base. Because the majority of the time you are not going to get them back.

Yes Hasbro is a huge company, but news does travel fast about anything perceived or not. It also helps their competition as well.
Any name brand can become toxic. Right now with their sub standard modules, their layoffs, and these robo C&D's sounds like to me that WotC has been given a quota to meet on a yearly basis.

Looks like to me another 4thED business fiasco in the making.

Finally it does NOT matter if Hasbro is right or wrong. It is HOW Hasbro is handling their IP's. And it looks like this is the standard heavy handed method. Quite frankly, at this moment this is the typical business tactic done by a souless organization.

 

[Shasarak]

Do you have a citation for this? Because I'm pretty sure something like "Book of Erotic Fantasy" didn't help the sales of D&D. In fact, I've seen it used by the anti-D&D crowd as an example of how it's such a horrible game. And as a creator? I can tell you I don't want someone using my material to put out garbage like that and getting my creations stained with such a reputation.

It always amazes me that a game based on murdering things to get their stuff would threatened by a book that focuses on having sex with them instead.

Did no one ever watch original Star Trek?

 

[delericho]

I already pointed out: sending out C&Ds when you're releasing your own products (or licensing them) is one thing. Sending out C&Ds with no clear intention of doing so...

I wouldn't be surprised to find that it's software they're going after, more than just Character Builders specifically. After all, we know that a Character Builder isn't a video game, but does that one overworked guy in Hasbro's Legal Dept know that? Perhaps more importantly, do WotC's potential license partners know that - or are they liable to use the existence of a CB as reason to demand a better licensing fee?

Not that it matters all that much: Dausuul's post above indicates that this CB was clearly infringing on WotC's IP. Assuming that's right (and I have no reason to doubt him), then WotC are absolutely within their rights to have this pulled, competing product or not.

 

[ren1999]

I'm now calling for a boycott of Wizards.
Let's make our own game.