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).

​

 

[Dire Bare]

It's common, but it's annoying as heck. I don't discuss stuff with people who do it, either. It basically turns a single conversation into 10 different ones, and then those 10 conversations in 10 more. It's a variation on the gish-gallop, and once it begins, the only real option is to back out or block out a week of spare time to deal with it.

Huh. Learn something new every day! I honestly see this all the time here, do it myself, and have no issue when folks do it to me. I'm kinda the opposite, when you want to discuss part of someone's post, quoting the whole thing annoys me!

But it's good to know that this annoys others, I honestly had no idea. Personally, I won't exactly stop, but will be more careful not to snip out things that change what is being said in someone's post I'm responding to. And I've certainly seen this practice taken to the extreme, with dozens of mini-quotes making a response post a bear to read . . . but I also tend to skip "wall-of-text" posts also . . .

 

[Dire Bare]

I said not announcing their plans is tantamount in the eyes of the consumer to having no plans. The default assumption should never be one of trust and assumption of further production. WOTC has been burned? Sure. But they've done a good deal of burning themselves, both to consumers and to those partnered with them. I have no reason to trust in the good judgement of WOTC as a business, indeed we have all been given plenty of reason over the years NOT to trust in the judgement of WOTC when it comes to D&D.

No, no it's not. In your eyes, obviously, but the average consumer? No. And even if it did, so what? Because WotC has not announced plans, and you therefore assume they have *no plans*, it's okay for you to infringe upon their copyrights and create your own for-profit product that could compete with any future (announced) plans? Or even a not-for-profit fan product that still infringes on their copyrights and could compete with future, announced, plans?

No.

WotC, or one of their licensed partners, hasn't announced any plans for a new D&D movie. They are clearly battling in court over the rights, but have not announced any plans. So, therefore, that's *tantamount* to not having plans. So, it's okay for me to start production on my own D&D movie, right? I mean, there's nothing official for me to compete against, is there? And if WotC pressures me to stop, politely or otherwise, I guess that means they are being a big bully, huh?

 

[Sunseeker]

No, no it's not. In your eyes, obviously, but the average consumer? No. And even if it did, so what? Because WotC has not announced plans, and you therefore assume they have *no plans*, it's okay for you to infringe upon their copyrights and create your own for-profit product that could compete with any future (announced) plans? Or even a not-for-profit fan product that still infringes on their copyrights and could compete with future, announced, plans?

No.

WotC, or one of their licensed partners, hasn't announced any plans for a new D&D movie. They are clearly battling in court over the rights, but have not announced any plans. So, therefore, that's *tantamount* to not having plans. So, it's okay for me to start production on my own D&D movie, right? I mean, there's nothing official for me to compete against, is there? And if WotC pressures me to stop, politely or otherwise, I guess that means they are being a big bully, huh?

No.

Obviously WOTC wants to produce a new D&D movie. I don't think they could make that much clearer with the fact that they are going to court to regain their rights from whatever that other company is that has made all the terrible D&D movies so far, or some of them.

But I'm not talking about WOTC wanting to produce anything at all. I'm talking about a specific product. One that there is clearly a demand for. One that does not require the amount of investment WOTC has been putting into and not following through with on the issue. For the amount of money WOTC has spent on their failed apps, they could likely have hired everyone they send a C&D to and already produced a product.

So now we're left with no product. No clear intentions to make a product. And no competing products to fill the gap.

I trust one thing: businesses want to make money. This thing that WOTC is doing? That's not how you make money.
Announce the creation and soon-to-be release of a product. Send out C&Ds. Direct people to your product. Money made.
Announce nothing. Release nothing. Send out C&Ds to stifle the market. Direct people to nothing. No money made.

When businesses make moves that are not in the interest of furthering their immediate profits, I question their motives. All actions cost money. If the end result of spending money isn't to make more money, then why take the action?

 

[DaveDash]

All of my nerdy friends are active on the internet, but few regularly visit message boards of any type, ENWorld, WotC, rpgnet, etc, etc. And few pay any attention at all to what's going on with RPG news. Anecdotal, of course, but I also doubt that fans active on internet message boards are a decent portion of the D&D fan base. I'm sure the situation has changed since the 90s, and I'm not saying message board fans are insignificantly small, but the endless back-and-forth in these threads certainly isn't impactful, IMO.

Of course, kinda hard to tell. I'm sure WotC has studied the situation in their market research, and that it factors in to how they deal with copyright and trademark infringers. Perhaps by sending polite requests rather than scary, threatening, C&D's?

I agree with this. I'm the only one in my group that hangs out on the forums and learns about these things. I don't even discuss it with anyone outside the forums really, because I know very little about the facts of the matter.

 

[redrick]

I am confused by the surprise that a character builder would be off limits (from a legal standpoint.) Under 4e, the only major 3pp character builder I knew was Hero Lab. It required the end user to have a DDI subscription and then use a spider tool to rebuild all the build options from the Wizards website. Sort of a high tech version of saying, "you have to enter all the information yourself."

Similarly, Lone Wolf has indicated that they are developing a 5e character builder, but will release nothing without a clear license from Wizards. In the eyes of people who actually have something to lose, character builders require a license.

And, while I don't have the source on my phone, I remember Wizards saying that they still planned to release digital tools when the agreement with Trapdoor fell through. That's not a product announcement, for sure.

And finally, a fan receiving a request from wizards needn't be a major chilling action on fan creation. The point of fan content is that we create it for ourselves. Sharing it is great, but one instance of being asked not to do something isn't hardship. I'm not going to consult a lawyer just to keep a cop from asking me to stop standing somewhere. I'm gonna do my thing, and if I get yelled at, I'll stop. In other words, I create my fan content and I'll use it, and maybe I'll share it, and if wizards tells me to take it off my website, I'll move on. Since I'm a fan and not a business making money of an investment, it's not a load of skin off my back.

(Now, if I'm selling or profiting off borrowed IP, that's another story!)

I want digital tools for 5e. I want PDFs or ebooks or something because I do my reading on an ereader. I was a little angered at the trapdoor debacle, but that doesn't open the door up to freeloaders, ethically or legally.

 

[Rune]

Sorry. Phone browser is acting up. Didn't mean to laugh at your post (not even sure how it happened, since I wasn't on this page) and can't undo it.

 

[Dannager]

Wizards has the right to police its copy right and remove all products even though they don't have an official character generator.

Wizards also has the right to lose its entire fan base.

You're using the term "fan base" a little loosely, here. Policing intellectual property is a reality of business. Being able to stay in business is what allows companies to continue making products that fans enjoy. So I'll be abundantly clear: If WotC policing its intellectual property suddenly makes you want to boycott them, you probably weren't part of their fan base to begin with.

Or did you think being a fan was a one-way relationship where you're just entitled to things?

 

[DEFCON 1]

This 1990s dinosaur is a myth. 10 years ago it was true. Nowadays *everybody* goes on the internet to check out their hobbies, from grandmothers to children. If you're surrounded by people who don't do that, you're in a very unusual situation.

I look forward to seeing it announced on Wizards Twitter feed and Facebook page then that they have sent a C&D to d20 Fight Club. Because if their customer base is going to be pissed off about that, it'll have to show up via their primary method for gaining online info on it, right?

 

[ren1999]

If people are taking Wizard's intellectual property and making money off of it then it is perfectly o.k. for Wizards to send a Cease and Desist notice to them and get the application removed.

If fans are making no money off of a D&D5 online tool they created and Wizards has no official alternative, then that is terribly evil for Wizards to send a Cease and Desist notice to the fans and force them to remove the application.

The fact that the Wizards legal department doesn't know the difference is what really bothers me here.

I'll tell this story again in case you haven't heard it. FOX network's legal department went around the entire Internet and forced its Simpson's fans to remove images of Homer and Bart. Those fans were promoting the Simpsons animated tv show to people all over the world. Those fans were helping the Simpson's show. But the legal department didn't understand that. Yes the show is still running, no thanks to the viscious embarrassing punishment of its fans by those who made the show.

Wizards seems to me to be an unethical disloyal group that does not respect its employees who created the game, nor does it respect its fans that spent years playtesting the game for free, nor does it respect fans such as Pathguy who put out a Character Generator to help people create characters and navigate through the game and learn how to play it. The Player's Handbook does a very poor job organizing and ordering the steps of character creation.

If you have your own company, never punish your fans for producing something that promotes your product or producing something that you don't have, such as an online character generator. That is just basic business sense. Something Wizards doesn't seem to have seeing as how the 5E game system was designed by the fans and Wizards botched the editing, formating and even the quality of the books.

But I will step down off the pulpit now. It is foolish of me to expect Wizards to make a good product when they gave us 4th Edition.

 

[Morrus]

I look forward to seeing it announced on Wizards Twitter feed and Facebook page then that they have sent a C&D to d20 Fight Club. Because if their customer base is going to be pissed off about that, it'll have to show up via their primary method for gaining online info on it, right?

I have no idea what that means. I'm detecting a snide tone, though.