** ARCHIVED FORUM - ANY CHANGES ARE REVERTED HOURLY **



It is currently Dec 18, 2024 1:30 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 56 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Q&A with Dustin Clingman
PostPosted: Jun 14, 2019 10:05 am 
Offline
Duke
Duke
User avatar

Joined: Oct 26, 2012 2:46 pm
Posts: 2022
Perhaps Dustin can help solving this ( viewtopic.php?p=35893#p35893 ) mystery?

_________________
He's a real Nowhere man, sitting in his Nowhere land,
making all his Nowhere plans for Nobody.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Q&A with Dustin Clingman
PostPosted: Jan 18, 2021 4:19 am 
Offline
Yeoman
Yeoman

Joined: Feb 15, 2010 12:55 pm
Posts: 47
Recently, I listened/watched the great Blackmoor historical coverage that Aldarron gave on Lord Gosumba's Twitch broadcast. His mastery and explanation of the history of Blackmoor is really something. Kudos to him for giving more sunlight on the legacy of Dave, his players and Blackmoor.

While I have not completed the entire discussion (it's 2+ hours in total), there was one thing I wanted to comment on.

The question was posed: "Does Dave Arneson or Dave Arneson's family own Blackmoor?"

Daniel Boggs' response was: "...Dave's daughter owns the materials that Dave created, and WoTC owns the published content (DA series, etc.)

When Dave and I started talk about publishing Blackmoor again for 3rd Edition D&D, the question of his ownership came up.

It was Dave's contention that he had not executed key documents transferring ownership of Blackmoor to WoTC and that he reserved those rights for himself. I'll be honest, it was at relatively early stage of my career as a business owner and I was a bit naive.

I accepted Dave's assertion at his word and began to invest into the project.

I can't recall the precise reasoning, but I remember reaching out to Wizards for something. I believe that I might have asked them if they wanted to do some co-promoting at GenCon.

The Brand Manager of D&D replied: "What makes you think you can publish a 3rd edition D&D using Blackmoor?"

I'll save some of the details for a later telling of the full story, but let me affirm the following. Based on my personal observation of the documents as well as my General Counsel's evaluation, the following was true:

- Dave conveyed any and all interest in D&D and Blackmoor when he was bought out by WoTC
- WoTC is the sole owner of the Blackmoor copyright and trademark
- Zeitgeist Games was allowed a license to produce Blackmoor materials and we further affirmed the ownership of Blackmoor to WoTC in those materials.

It was my fault for not confirming the legality before we started the project, but we got lucky for a couple of reasons that I'll hold on to for a later story.

In the end, I'm glad it worked out the way it did. If we hadn't proceeded and I wasn't out a bunch of money, I would have looked for other project and the motivation to work out the license with Wizards would not have taken place.

Happy to take some questions on this, but hearing an opposing viewpoint, I wanted to set the record clear.

POSTSCRIPT EDIT: To clarify my comments a bit more around ownership. It's possible that the comments on stream referred to First Fantasy Campaign materials, rather than the component elements of Blackmoor Supplements, DA1-4, etc.

It is possible that some elements of those works might potentially fall in ownership to Dave's family. If you're familiar with those materials, you might also note that it includes terms like "Hobbit" and others that certainly did not belong to Dave or Judge's Guild at the time of printing.

For clarity, most proper names, places, events and terms were identified in the above agreement I mentioned. I even used those when I requested a special license from WoTC so we could name the facility at Full Sail after Blackmoor. Please see: https://www.fullsail.edu/about/full-sai ... -on-campus

The different rooms are all named after specific locations in Blackmoor and it's such a wonderful homage to Dave. The Blackmoor Castle model is also there as well as some other key artifacts.

Best,
Dustin


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Q&A with Dustin Clingman
PostPosted: Jan 20, 2021 8:06 pm 
Offline
Count
Count
User avatar

Joined: Feb 01, 2010 11:59 am
Posts: 1023
Location: Schenectady
Thanks Dustin - that's terrific information and thanks much for the Kudos. Honestly I find the rights situation a little bit murky and as with many things I said in the stream, I was trying to cover a whole lot of ground in a succinct fashion. Even so there were dozens of things I wanted to say more about but knew there was only so much time!

Yeah, what I was trying to convey was that it is my understanding that Wotc owns all rights to the setting and characters as presented in the DA material, and as is found in Supplement II Blackmoor. I *think* the Arneson family has the rights to the distinctive aspects of Blackmoor as presented in the First Fantasy Campaign booklet by Judges guild, which is much more limited in scope. Likewise I *think* Zeitgeist holds the rights to materials uniquely developed in the DAB books, but it is all rather entwined. And then there is "Blackmoor" related material out there that's someone elses entirely, like the Blackmoor and Temple of the Frog references in Andre Norton's Quag Keep.

But I'm no lawyer and I'm very sure you know much more about it than me! Does that sound about right Dustin?

_________________
"The gamemaster may find that sometimes it is a good idea to just let the unexpected lead where it will." Dave Arneson - DNA DOA

'blog https://www.blogger.com/home


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Q&A with Dustin Clingman
PostPosted: Feb 06, 2021 11:23 pm 
Offline
Yeoman
Yeoman

Joined: Feb 15, 2010 12:55 pm
Posts: 47
Sorry to take so long to respond.

[quote]"Yeah, what I was trying to convey was that it is my understanding that Wotc owns all rights to the setting and characters as presented in the DA material, and as is found in Supplement II Blackmoor. I *think* the Arneson family has the rights to the distinctive aspects of Blackmoor as presented in the First Fantasy Campaign booklet by Judges guild, which is much more limited in scope. Likewise I *think* Zeitgeist holds the rights to materials uniquely developed in the DAB books, but it is all rather entwined. And then there is "Blackmoor" related material out there that's someone elses entirely, like the Blackmoor and Temple of the Frog references in Andre Norton's Quag Keep. [/quote]

I mentioned in my clarifying comment that when the license was negotiated between ZG and WoTC, we identified all of the names and terms that we wanted to use for the 3rd edition setting. This included all the NPCs(The Great Svenny et al), Places of note and more. We further had to affirm that WoTC was the owner of those terms.

It would be very hard for me to say that there is anything distinctive such that it could be considered owned by Dave's family. Certainly, it could be said that they may lay claim to the copyright of the Judges Guild Materials, but were they to commercialize those documents again, I would expect it to result in an issue with Wizards.

It's also true to say that ZG owns our special contributions and NPCs (meaning me at this point).

Some fans really wanted a very faithful rendition of Blackmoor for the 3rd Edition. Had we been even more faithful to the original setting, I'm convinced that we might have done just fine, but the plan that Dave and I had was different.

We both knew and agreed that Blackmoor could get us started and that we wanted to create a new world that would be free of Blackmoor. We had ideas/plans to transition many of the core unique elements of Blackmoor 3e into another world that Dave was ideating about all the while.

I asked Dave at one point - "Do you worry that we're tinkering too much with the formula? Will players like this iteration of Blackmoor?"

His response was to say - "This newest work we're doing in the world is just 'A Blackmoor'. There are many Blackmoor and infinite stories to tell within them..."
( Please note that I am paraphrasing from memory of something that happened almost 20 years ago at this point)

He then went on to remind me about the Blackmoor with dinosaurs and Nazis and how much fun they had in "that" Blackmoor.

This memory has warmed my day. Thanks for the question that prompted it back to front of mind.

Dustin


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Q&A with Dustin Clingman
PostPosted: Feb 07, 2021 1:26 pm 
Offline
Lord of the Regency Council
Lord of the Regency Council
User avatar

Joined: Nov 17, 2009 2:48 pm
Posts: 7335
Location: Norway, Europe

_________________
Currently Running: The Blackmoor Vales Saga
Currently Playing: Daniel S. Debelfry in the Throne of Star's Campaign


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Q&A with Dustin Clingman
PostPosted: Feb 07, 2021 9:25 pm 
Offline
Le Noir Faineant
User avatar

Joined: Nov 19, 2009 6:47 am
Posts: 6029
Location: Germany
Great to see you are keeping around, Dustin. Havard and I are, in the end, here today because you summoned us from the lonelinesses of our basements, back in '04/'05, to the old ZGG forum. Nobody has forgotten that. :)

As to the copyright situation, I think the conversation on the topic has always been somewhat "backwards": Multiple people or "legal persons" sharing rights of use, copyright, or authorial rights is not a rarity - it's usually the norm. The question is whether they can work independently from one another without violating each other's respective rights, especially in the case of Arneson's works. It might not seem so, but from a legal point of view, this is super-interesting:

For example, could WotC really claim exclusive usage rights of Arneson's works related to the IPs they own? And how would Arneson's example translate to other authors like him if WotC couldn't make that claim? Linked to this is also the question about when a certain (legal) item stops being a derivative of its earlier model: Say, to name the simplest of examples, after which point would Havard's version of Blackmoor be fully owned by him despite the connection to material that is the IP of someone else?

We've had rulings on this stuff, and we've had the lobbying of Disney and similar companies, over the years - but until a ruling on Youtube fan videos from a few years ago, these questions were never really tested in court. I, for my part, would love to see such a test happen, especially in connection with D&D.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 56 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
Copyright © The Comeback Inn
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.027s | 14 Queries | GZIP : Off ]