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).

​

 

[painted_klown]

There is a weird line in there which says that if you use *anything* from wizards.com you agree to the rules, which sounds fairly weak a far as enforceability goes to me (a lawyer might weigh in). And another weird line which says that you can't post unapproved photos or pics of upcoming stuff anywhere (which would prevent me showing the Temple of Elemental Evil board game contents in the news today, for example). So it's not a policy suitable for a website like this one.

Interesting, to say the least. I would assume that this website would be considered a fansite as it's not an official forum, correct?

If the wording is that you aren't allowed to show any upcoming products and use logos at the same time, wouldn't this essentially restrict all RPG news sites from reporting about D&D?

Am I mis-understanding this?

 

[Dausuul]

If the wording is that you aren't allowed to show any upcoming products and use logos at the same time, wouldn't this essentially restrict all RPG news sites from reporting about D&D?

I expect it's covered under "fair use." Legally, there are a number of circumstances where it's permissible to reproduce copyrighted material. If you're just reproducing excerpts for reporting purposes, you're usually okay.

Funny thing. I was looking for an EN World thread on the new Fan Site Kit and found a real long one. It took me a few pages of reading to realize it was from 2009. With a few changes, the text is virtually the same from the 2009 kit for 4e, including reference to a GSL.

Based on that, I suspect we won't see an OGL, but we will see a new GSL. Hopefully less restrictive than the old one.

I wouldn't read too much into that fan site policy. It's dated 1/1/14, well before 5E's release. I expect Wizards is still wrestling internally with what the new policy should look like; in the meantime, the old 4E fan site policy remains in place.

Here's a question. Fight Club was reproducing lots of stuff from the PHB. Do we have any examples of people getting C&Ds for Basic-only content? Even though Wizards gives BD&D away for free, they still have the option to block anyone from using it in derivative works. I'm curious to know if they're exercising that option. If not, it might be a tip-off to what they have in mind for an open license.

 

[Iosue]

I expect it's covered under "fair use." Legally, there are a number of circumstances where it's permissible to reproduce copyrighted material. If you're just reproducing excerpts for reporting purposes, you're usually okay.

I am not a lawyer, natch, but it struck me as the kind of thing to prevent sites from passing themselves off as official sites making announcements, particularly with leaked art or other media. So, the contents of an announced, soon to be released game? I don't think they would have batted an eye. OTOH, the early leaked cover art for the (unannounced!) Elemental Evil products probably would not have been kosher, at least on any section of the site using art from the Fan Site Kit.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

correct me if I'm wrong, but that fan site policy would let me open up a page, and put my house rules, and homebrew on it no problem...as long as I wasn't charging...

 

[Morrus]

Interesting, to say the least. I would assume that this website would be considered a fansite as it's not an official forum, correct?

If the wording is that you aren't allowed to show any upcoming products and use logos at the same time, wouldn't this essentially restrict all RPG news sites from reporting about D&D?

Am I mis-understanding this?

Yup. It only applies to you if you agree to it.

It's a good deal for fan sites. News sites would obviously do their own thing.

 

[Gecko85]

Here's a question. Fight Club was reproducing lots of stuff from the PHB. Do we have any examples of people getting C&Ds for Basic-only content? Even though Wizards gives BD&D away for free, they still have the option to block anyone from using it in derivative works. I'm curious to know if they're exercising that option. If not, it might be a tip-off to what they have in mind for an open license.

I don't think Fight Club has/had any info from the PHB - it was only from the Basic rules. When I created my Bard, I had to enter most things manually relating to the Bard class, since Fight Club only had class info for the classes in the Basic rules. The only spells it had were Wizard and Cleric. Anything else would have to be entered manually.

I believe if the creator removes D20 from the name, removes the Wizard and Cleric spells, and possibly makes the race names generic (not sure about that one - does WotC hold copyright for things like Dwarf and Elf? Probably not...), he'll be able to start selling it again. In other words: make it as generic as possible.

 

[Gecko85]

Also, it sounds like the developer is hopeful. He posted on FB that this won't affect any current users of the app (meaning, he wasn't asked to push an update removing existing functionality/info), just that he can't offer the app "for the time being". That, to me, sounds like he believes he'll be able to offer a re-worked app at some point.

 

[ren1999]

I really want to thank every one who responded here to my comments.

In summary, I think it is wrong for people to sell Wizards content in an app.

I think it is wrong for Wizards to force fans to take down free apps that Wizards has no official app for.

Pathguy's app was so useful. I could not keep track of all the class feature details without his character generator.

Spell summary lists were also vital and saved me a lot of prep time. But all the lists were taken down.

The attitude of some of you, you know who you are, is just terrible.
D&D is just a job to you. You spit on the fans. When I ask you to play-test your own modules you wrote, you argue with me and make excuses saying it ain't your job. Honestly, you smoke too much pot when you should be working.

No names, but you are the reason 5E won't grow.

 

[Dausuul]

Also, it sounds like the developer is hopeful. He posted on FB that this won't affect any current users of the app (meaning, he wasn't asked to push an update removing existing functionality/info), just that he can't offer the app "for the time being". That, to me, sounds like he believes he'll be able to offer a re-worked app at some point.

Ha, didn't see that. Also didn't realize it was using only Basic content--I could have sworn when I looked at it it had stuff from the PHB as well as Basic. Maybe I was looking at something else.

Anyway, that all sounds pretty encouraging for those of us hoping for a 5E OGL, or at least a much less restrictive GSL.

 

[Dausuul]

The attitude of some of you, you know who you are, is just terrible.
D&D is just a job to you. You spit on the fans. When I ask you to play-test your own modules you wrote, you argue with me and make excuses saying it ain't your job. Honestly, you smoke too much pot when you should be working.

They may know who they are, but I have no idea who you're talking about.