TSR TSR3.5 Launches IndieGogo Campaign to "Stop" WotC

The latest in the TSR3 saga, which has gone quiet for a while, is a new IndieGoGo campaign launched to "stop Wizards of the Coast". They cite wrongful bullying of TSR, and refusal to answer requests that WotC show TSR "proof of their claims" (although the campaign page doesn't mention what those claims are).

The IndieGoGo campaign was launched yesterday and has so far raised $675 (at the time of writing).

The action TSR seeks is a "Trademark Declaratory Judgement of Ownership" which is a court declaration about the status of something in dispute.

TSR has launched a campaign to stop Wizards of the Coast

Become a Champion of TSR and Support TSR’s campaign against Wizards of the Coast!

TSR is taking a stand against Wizards of the Coast (“WOTC”) and its wrongful bullying of TSR, our trademarks, and its public libeling and slander of all those who helped create TSR based Dungeons & Dragons and products.

Wizards of the Coast has continually bullied TSR regarding TSR’s legally owned Trademarks. Wizards of the Coast has refused to answer all of TSR's repeated requests that they show any proof of their claims. Wizards of the Coast has the vast resources behind them and is implying to bring them to bear down on TSR.


The new TSR suffered widespread pushback when it launched, which they blamed on WotC, claiming that they were under a "coordinated assault across various channels being mounted.... by [WotC]" The company announced itself earlier this year, having acquired the TSR trademark after the previous holder accidentally let it lapse. It was run by Ernie Gygax, Justin LaNasa, and Stephen Dinehart. After several weeks of controversy, the company split into two -- Wonderfilled (Stephen Dinehart), and TSR (Ernie Gygax and Justin LaNasa).


zw5pyzcqtfqc7xu2.jpg


The page also indicates an intention to "fight to have WotC's legacy product disclaimer removed" from older products (that's the disclaimer on the older books available on DMs Guild which indicates that those books are products of their time) by claiming that the disclaimer portrays the creators of those older products as "as supporting those alleged prejudices, stereotypes and bigotry, wrongfully claimed to be part of those products".


TSR will also Fight to Have the WOTC Legacy Disclaimer Removed

TSR is suing WOTC for Trademark Declaratory Judgement of Ownership . TSR will also pursue in the near future having WOTC remove the legacy content disclaimer placed on TSR based Dungeons & Dragons and other products, and retractions of any other libel and slander which alleges that racism and other heinous beliefs are incorporated into those products.

This disclaimer attempts to make a statement of fact argument, and therefore paints all of the writers, editors, artists and consumers of those products as supporting those alleged prejudices, stereotypes and bigotry, wrongfully claimed to be part of those products. This statement by Wizards of the Coast opens the possibility for the producers and players of these "Legacy Products" to face ridicule, and face the labeling as "bigots", "racists", "misogynists", and worse Cyber & Physical Attacks!

Wizards of the Coast legacy content disclaimer.

"We (Wizards) recognize that some of the legacy content available on this website does not reflect the values of the Dungeons & Dragons franchise today. Some older content may reflect ethnic, racial, and gender prejudice that were commonplace in American society at that time. These depictions were wrong then and are wrong today. This content is presented as it was originally created, because to do otherwise would be the same as claiming these prejudices never existed. Dungeons & Dragons teaches that diversity is a strength, and we strive to make our D&D products as welcoming and inclusive as possible. This part of our work will never end".


TSR3's Justin LaNasa spoke about the campaign in a YouTube video.


 

log in or register to remove this ad

Is it correct that LLC structure only protects you if you are doing a good faith effort to follow all of the legal requirements? (So, lying on paperwork, or about what safety standards your following, or the like might leave you vulnerable?).

Let me start with the standard, I Am Not A Lawyer, do not take what I say as legal advice.

I do however am involved with 6 different LLCs plus a C-Corp. All the LLCs that I have a stake in are partnerships and I help my mother administer two sole-proprietorships. I also slept at [brand] hotel and that somehow makes me smart.

The short answer is, its complicated. If you lie on your paperwork the only way that it makes your personal assets vulnerable is if the LLC is somehow invalidated. There is a concept of "Piercing the Corporate Veil" in US law. I think this is one you are asking about, because when you do this you loose the limited liability provided by your business. You have to do something pretty egregious for the courts to remove it.

And as slimy as NuTSR is acting it probably doesn't rise to this level, unfortunately. Believe me, I would love to see them get smacked hard by the courts.

And by the way, it is unlikely WotC will own the tattoo parlor, it is probably a separate corporate entity and this not subject to any claims in the NuTSR legal battle, even if Lanassa is an owner of it because the Corporate Veil will protect his personal assets and the other corporate entities that are separate from NuTSR. The only way the tattoo parlor comes into play is if Lanassa co-mingled funds directly between the two entities.


I am sure the lawyers on this board can give a more nuanced version of this (without it being legal advice).
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad




and I should add, the TSR Army of one special individual doxxed me on the YouTube channel. I guess the attention this is getting isn't welcomed.

I'll share what I shared on youtube and FB:

So, VP-APNI (over at The Tavern's Youtube Channel) just spammed the channel with 10 comments on tonight's post, with my "real" last name, because of TSR3 defense "reasons". The posts are deleted, not because he was posting my "real" last name - Stiene - which is in Swords & Wizardry Light, Swords & Wizardry Complete, AND is listed at BoardGame Geeks (I don't hide it), but because he was spamming the channel with literal spam. Ah, the TSR ARMY, an army of one special individual. BTW, there never was a deli on Haspel Street, VP-APNI. Now get your f'n shine box!

edited
They are really the crators of D&D... Dumb & Doxxing
 

On the LLC front, it really depends on the nature of the LLC. Is it a sole proprietorship, partnership, or with the right additional paperwork structured like a C-Corp (I know the non-business/accounting/legal folks just went into a coma with that opening).

Mainly the LLC structure prevents someone legally going after your personal assets. It acts as a firewall legally so that only the assets of the LLC are vulnerable. So, only money Lanassa or any other individual who is a partner put into the LLC (plus anything "earned" by that LLC) are on the line. It gets more complicated when you have multiple LLCs nested in one another (sharing a single Tax ID for example).

For example, TTRPG Alpha, LLC is the parent entity and TTRPG Beta, LLC is a Doing Business As (DBA) entity for TTRPG Alpha, LLC. Both share a single Tax ID and file their taxes together but have separate bank accounts, asset listings, depreciation schedules, etc. Technically Alpha is not protected from any action against Beta, but if you then create another DBA entity TTRPG, Charlie that shares Alpha's Tax ID, it would protect its assets from any action against Beta. Think of Alpha as a parent company like Hasbro is to the Beta, WotC.

Glad I could help your head aches along... This is the end of my TED talk.
Can you indeed make another LLC (a legally incorporated entity) a DBA? My understanding is that a Doing Business As name is an alternate trade name or "fictitious name" (depending on the state), but is not a legally-incorporated entity of its own.

You can of course have a separate legal entity which is a Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of its Parent company, a Disregarded Entity for tax purposes (meaning it pays taxes through its parent, rather than on its own). Line 2 of a w9 is for both DBA names or Disregarded Entity names, where the taxpaying entity's name goes on Line 1, but to my understanding these are separate concepts. DBAs being trade names or just internal departments or divisions of the single legal entity, and Disregarded Entities being a separately-incorporated entity which is wholly-owned by and pays taxes under the Parent. Technically any incorporated entity gets its own Tax ID; it just can choose not to use it and file through the Parent.
 





Remove ads

Remove ads

Top