Palladium v. WotC Press Release
Peter D. Adkison
What follows is a press release issued by Palladium Books(r) in
response to an earlier press release by Wizards of the Coast. In the
interest of keeping the gaming public better informed, I am passing
this along. I've typed it in from the original and apologize in
advance for any typos that might have creeped in during that process.
Peter D. Adkison
ma...@wizards.com
President, Wizards of the Coast
3/6/93
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Palladium books(r) Press Release -- February 18, 1993
RE: Palladium Books Inc. versus Wizards of the Coast
By now most of you have probably received a press release from
Wizards of the Coast regarding a lawsuit between them and Palladium
Books Inc. Before its press release, the Wizards of the Coast had
expressed serious concern about publicity and emphatically asked that
Palladium keep the matter confidential. Palladium agreed. We were
astonished when we later learned that Wizards of the Coast had
distributed a one-sided press release about the lawsuit to
distributors and industry professionals. The press release has
spawned subsequent coverage in the GAMA newsletter and we presume
other newsletters and magazines will follow with additional coverage.
This new turn of events compels me to issue this statement.
The Wizards' press release paints a rather one-sided picture.
This suit was only started because they had, in our opinion, infringed
Palladium's registered trademarks and copyrights, and refused to
discuss any amicable resolution. Palladium had contacted them prior
to bringing any lawsuit in hopes of reaching such a settlement. At
this point, Wizards of the Coast told us thy had every right to use
our intellectual properties without permission and that there was no
reason for settlement discussions. Additionally, they told us that if
we wished to pursue the matter further, we would have to take legal
action. At that point, Palladium's only choices were either to
abandon its intellectual properties or to litigate. It saddens me
that this matter has had to go through the courts, but Palladium was
left with no other recourse.
As most of you know, Palladium and I are firm believers in
creators' rights. We believe that copyright and trademark owners
should be the ones who decide when their copyrights and trademarks are
used commercially, and that people should not infringe registered
copyrights and trademarks. That's what this suit is really about.
Despite arguments by Wizards of the Coast's attorney to get
the suit thrown out of course, our lawsuit was judged valid by a
Federal judge, as a result of the Summary Judgement Hearing on
December 14, 1992, requested by Wizards.
The only two counts dismissed by the Federal Judge were on the
matter of "state" court questions. The Judge kept the four most
important counts including our claims of copyright and trademark
infringement. The suit continues in Federal court.
The Wizards' press release talks about cooperation within the
industry and how some manufacturers were happy to be included in The
Primal Order supplement and generously wrote the conversion rules for
the book. Regrettably, Wizards of the Coast has *never* shown
Palladium Books any level of consideration or cooperation.
Palladium was not notified in any way regarding Wizards' plans
for The Primal Order. We were not informed that Palladium would be
included in the publication in any way. We were never told of their
plans, nor asked to work with them to accomplish any "mutual goals."
Palladium was never asked to contribute to such a project and was
certainly never given any opportunity to provide conversion rules as,
apparently, were other companies.
The word "mutual" means: "1. Having the same relationship each
to the other: mutual well wishers. ... 3. Possessed in common: mutual
interest." The word "cooperate" means: "1. To work or act together
toward a common end or purpose." Definitions taken from the American
Heritage Illustrated Encyclopedic Dictionary.
There can be no cooperation or mutual benefit, if one party
unilaterally acts for another without that other party's knowledge or
consent. Hardly the spirit of mutual cooperation.
I personally, found Wizards of the Coast's statements about
how much this suit has hurt them financially, followed by their plea
for financial aid from the industry and an "industry alliance" to
support them in this lawsuit to be unconscionable! In my opinion, it
is unprofessional and unreasonable to solicit fellow industry people
such as manufacturers, distributors, and retailers to pick sides and
provide financial support for any one party in a dispute between two
companies. Wizards has had every opportunity to resolve this matter
and has chosen not to. Palladium has done nothing except exercise our
legal rights under Federal law. The legal costs are a burden to both
parties involved, but if the matter must be decided in a court of law,
so be it.
Our legal system may have its flaws but it does work.
Palladium is confident that we will win this suit and prepares to go
to trial. In the meanwhile, we hope that Wizards will enter into
meaningful settlement discussion. I further hope they stop their
publicity campaign which I personally feel is motivated by frustration
and vindictiveness.
Sincerely,
Kevin Siembieda
President, Palladium Books Inc.
Palladium Books Inc.
12455 Universal Drive
Taylor, MI 48180
USA
Copyright 1993 Kevin Siembieda
Palladium Books is a registered trademark owned by Kevin Siembieda
Peter D. Adkison
What follows are my comments on the Palladium Press Release. I
debated long on hard whether I wanted to comment or not. By doing so
I risk coming accross as participating in a game of "Did too! Did
not! Did too! Did not!," but this is too important for me to just
sit by and not comment.
Peter D. Adkison
Wizards of the Coast
3/6/93
--------------------------------------------------------------------
> Palladium books(r) Press Release -- February 18, 1993
> RE: Palladium Books Inc. versus Wizards of the Coast
Correction, it's Palladium Books and Kevin Siembieda versus Wizards of
the Coast.
> By now most of you have probably received a press release from
> Wizards of the Coast regarding a lawsuit between them and Palladium
> Books Inc. Before its press release, the Wizards of the Coast had
> expressed serious concern about publicity and emphatically asked that
> Palladium keep the matter confidential. Palladium agreed. We were
> astonished when we later learned that Wizards of the Coast had
> distributed a one-sided press release about the lawsuit to
> distributors and industry professionals. The press release has
> spawned subsequent coverage in the GAMA newsletter and we presume
> other newsletters and magazines will follow with additional coverage.
> This new turn of events compels me to issue this statement.
Two comments:
(1) We did not discuss the suit earlier with the press because we were
concerned about bad press for *both* parties. After settlement
negotiations and the summary judgement each failed to resolve the
issue it becamse obvious that this was going to trial. At that point
we issued our press release. But we never ever asked them not to tell
anyone about this suit.
(2) Throughout every step of the settlement discussion Palladium
demanded that as a part of settlement we would have to sign an
"admission of guilt." We said we wouldn't because it would open
ourselves up to additional suits by other parties, but that if we ever
did, that statement would have to be held confidential.
> The Wizards' press release paints a rather one-sided picture.
> This suit was only started because they had, in our opinion, infringed
> Palladium's registered trademarks and copyrights, and refused to
> discuss any amicable resolution. Palladium had contacted them prior
> to bringing any lawsuit in hopes of reaching such a settlement. At
> this point, Wizards of the Coast told us thy had every right to use
> our intellectual properties without permission and that there was no
> reason for settlement discussions. Additionally, they told us that if
> we wished to pursue the matter further, we would have to take legal
> action. At that point, Palladium's only choices were either to
> abandon its intellectual properties or to litigate. It saddens me
> that this matter has had to go through the courts, but Palladium was
> left with no other recourse.
The sequence was like this: (1) They threatened to sue, offering to
*not* sue only if met certain demands, like the admission of guilt,
withdrawing The Primal Order from our product line, etc. (2) We said
that we wouldn't meet those demands. That their idea of us refusing
to enter "meaningful settlement discussions."
> As most of you know, Palladium and I are firm believers in
> creators' rights. We believe that copyright and trademark owners
> should be the ones who decide when their copyrights and trademarks are
> used commercially, and that people should not infringe registered
> copyrights and trademarks. That's what this suit is really about.
I think Mr. Siembieda's opinion of the rights of copyright and
trademark owners differs from the rights set forth by law.
> Despite arguments by Wizards of the Coast's attorney to get
> the suit thrown out of course, our lawsuit was judged valid by a
> Federal judge, as a result of the Summary Judgement Hearing on
> December 14, 1992, requested by Wizards.
It should be pointed out that the hearing was a non-evidentiary
hearing, meaning that the judge could not look at The Primal Order and
judge for himself as to whether or not Palladium's accusations held
any merrit.
> The only two counts dismissed by the Federal Judge were on the
> matter of "state" court questions. The Judge kept the four most
> important counts including our claims of copyright and trademark
> infringement. The suit continues in Federal court.
True enough.
> The Wizards' press release talks about cooperation within the
> industry and how some manufacturers were happy to be included in The
> Primal Order supplement and generously wrote the conversion rules for
> the book. Regrettably, Wizards of the Coast has *never* shown
> Palladium Books any level of consideration or cooperation.
> Palladium was not notified in any way regarding Wizards' plans
> for The Primal Order. We were not informed that Palladium would be
> included in the publication in any way. We were never told of their
> plans, nor asked to work with them to accomplish any "mutual goals."
> Palladium was never asked to contribute to such a project and was
> certainly never given any opportunity to provide conversion rules as,
> apparently, were other companies.
We never specifically excluded Palladium from such discussions, it's
just that we only *included* game companies in such discussions if a
gaming rep was online, the company was local, or some other
convenience arose.
> The word "mutual" means: "1. Having the same relationship each
> to the other: mutual well wishers. ... 3. Possessed in common: mutual
> interest." The word "cooperate" means: "1. To work or act together
> toward a common end or purpose." Definitions taken from the American
> Heritage Illustrated Encyclopedic Dictionary.
It figures that he'd need a dictionary with pictures. :-)
> There can be no cooperation or mutual benefit, if one party
> unilaterally acts for another without that other party's knowledge or
> consent. Hardly the spirit of mutual cooperation.
Our goal is to improve the gaming industry as a whole. We assumed this
was a mutual goal of all gaming companies, but perhaps we were wrong.
> I personally, found Wizards of the Coast's statements about
> how much this suit has hurt them financially, followed by their plea
> for financial aid from the industry and an "industry alliance" to
> support them in this lawsuit to be unconscionable! In my opinion, it
> is unprofessional and unreasonable to solicit fellow industry people
> such as manufacturers, distributors, and retailers to pick sides and
> provide financial support for any one party in a dispute between two
> companies. Wizards has had every opportunity to resolve this matter
> and has chosen not to. Palladium has done nothing except exercise our
> legal rights under Federal law. The legal costs are a burden to both
> parties involved, but if the matter must be decided in a court of law,
> so be it.
Again, our only opportunities to resolve the matter would have
required signing an admission of guilt. We even considered settlement
that would involve us pulling TPO and paying their attorney fees, but
we will not sign that statement!
> Our legal system may have its flaws but it does work.
> Palladium is confident that we will win this suit and prepares to go
> to trial. In the meanwhile, we hope that Wizards will enter into
> meaningful settlement discussion. I further hope they stop their
> publicity campaign which I personally feel is motivated by frustration
> and vindictiveness.
The primary motivation is a desire to keep the gaming community
informed on this important piece of litigation. The outcome of this
trial, if it comes to that, will have an impact on our industry for
years to come.
> Sincerely,
> Kevin Siembieda
> President, Palladium Books Inc.
> Palladium Books Inc.
> 12455 Universal Drive
> Taylor, MI 48180
> USA
Those of you who wanted his address, there ya go!
> Copyright 1993 Kevin Siembieda
> Palladium Books is a registered trademark owned by Kevin Siembieda
I can't believe he copyrighted his own press release!
--Mavra!
Peter D. Adkison
Janitor, Wizards of the Coast
ma...@wizards.com
Steffan O'Sullivan
[quoting the Palladium press release first:]
>> Palladium was not notified in any way regarding Wizards' plans
>> for The Primal Order. We were not informed that Palladium would be
>> included in the publication in any way. We were never told of their
>> plans, nor asked to work with them to accomplish any "mutual goals."
>> Palladium was never asked to contribute to such a project and was
>> certainly never given any opportunity to provide conversion rules as,
>> apparently, were other companies.
>
>We never specifically excluded Palladium from such discussions, it's
>just that we only *included* game companies in such discussions if a
>gaming rep was online, the company was local, or some other
>convenience arose.
To be honest, I think you blew it here. It really would have been
courteous to ask every company whose product you included a conversion
for. I don't know the legality, but it would have at least been
polite.
--
- Steffan O'Sullivan s...@oz.plymouth.edu
Will Timmins
Well, peter, with very little knowledge of the case, you don't paint a good
picture of yourself.
I don't know about everybody else, but I'm much more inclined to listen to
polite, calm comments (even if grossly inaccurate) than to angry ones.
Not to say I side with Palladium. Frankly, I think it's no one else's business.
I wish people would keep their fights off the net. (ie- the wolfcon thang)
Beh.
-Me
--
[Pooh Bear incarnate. ]
[H1 C+ F+ W G+ K+ S+ R- E+ P ]
[ ]
[To email, please make sure to mail to po...@seismo.soar.cs.cmu.edu]
John Enzinas
>Well, peter, with very little knowledge of the case, you don't paint a good
>picture of yourself.
>I don't know about everybody else, but I'm much more inclined to listen to
>polite, calm comments (even if grossly inaccurate) than to angry ones.
>Not to say I side with Palladium. Frankly, I think it's no one else's business.
>I wish people would keep their fights off the net. (ie- the wolfcon thang)
that's the problem when you get involved in any sort of semi-public battle.
i am staff for wolfcon and the coordinator had much the same problem. one
has to decide weather it is better to give no quarter and make your
opponent fight for every inch of public opinion OR just say your piece and
be done with it.
the first makes you look petty, immature and small and most people get sick of
hearing about the same points constantly.
the second does not allow you to respond to whatever your opponent may say
but it saves a lot of hassels and stress, and in the end it's what was chosen.
palladium may have a reason for sewing(sp) WotC wether or not it stands up
in court after all they did include some stuff about the game.
BUT sewing the authors is just a bit rediculous. that would seem to
indicate that any one who has posted or written something with reference
to the rules of a game is vunerable.:(
Art Urban
it, only to find out that WotC are being sued, by some over zealous, game-
company-wannabe. Now I realize that I'm spouting "opinion" here, but I
don't want WotC hurt financially; I was desperately looking forward to the
Governmental Order.
Now why Paladium would start whining about TPO supporting their game system
is beyond me. Can't you just imagine the executives in their offices
thinking: "My god, we can't allow somebody to make our game system useful.
Then we'll have nice artwork *and* rules, and we know that nobody wants
that. Let's sue them for deigning to to include our product in a superior
reference work!"
My question for the folks at WotC is what will happen (has happened) to
future releases?
If I were WotC, I'd simply never include Paladium support ever again, in
any product. Gods! I just can't imagine *anybody* not wanting to be
included in a WotC work...fools.
--
Art Urban ur...@yoda.fsl.noaa.gov
===============================================================================
"Look, he's being attacked by creamy nougat centers." -Joel
===============================================================================
bra...@cc.usu.edu
>
> Sincerely,
> Kevin Siembieda
> President, Palladium Books Inc.
>
> Palladium Books Inc.
> 12455 Universal Drive
> Taylor, MI 48180
> USA
>
> Copyright 1993 Kevin Siembieda
> Palladium Books is a registered trademark owned by Kevin Siembieda
>
BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! GOD I can't tell you how much I despise this
egotistical idiot.
-Brandon
Benjamin R Pierce
>Good grief! I finally get around to buying TPO and fall madly in love with
>it, only to find out that WotC are being sued, by some over zealous, game-
>company-wannabe. Now I realize that I'm spouting "opinion" here, but I
>don't want WotC hurt financially; I was desperately looking forward to the
>Governmental Order.
>If I were WotC, I'd simply never include Paladium support ever again, in
>any product. Gods! I just can't imagine *anybody* not wanting to be
>included in a WotC work...fools.
Well, it's certainly nice to hear unbiased examination of the issues here.
I'd like to point out a few things:
1. Palladium, the "game-company-wannabe" you mention, is one of the largest
game companies in the world. They were the first to introduce the softbound
format for role-playing games which a lot of companies use (including WoTC).
2. It may be disproportionate, overzealous, and even rude for Palladium to sue
over this whole fiasco, but I feel that it was equally rude (at least) for
WoTC to make use of trademarks without bothering to ask permission
unless it was "convenient" for them.
3. At the same time, I am more than willing to concede that suing people for
simply participating in the project is foolish, uncalled for, and will
probably destroy Palladium's case if they attempt it, especially if the
individuals in question are not making any money from TPO.
4. Does saying, "Gee, Wizards of the Coast is my favoritest game company in
the whole world, so those mean Palladium people are stupid for not letting
them use their trademarks" really contribute anything useful to the
discussion?
In short, I feel that both companies in question have acted foolishly in this
situation: WoTC by not taking the trouble to get permission to use Palladium's
trademarks, and Palladium for overreacting to the situation.
--Ben
Robert Kelly
Simply, in my eyes, since I used to ref & play Palladium and have
read Primal Order... I also owned original copies of Mechaniods
(the second book) and Homeworld long ago...
I like both products.
But both companies smell like assholes.
Robert Kelly
rke...@triton.unm.edu
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Don't be stupid. Be a smarty.
Come and join the Nazi Party."
The Producers
Mithrandir(S)
>I like both products.
>But both companies smell like assholes.
Well, as someone wot has worked for them, and remained in contact
with WoTC for nearly a year at this stage, I can tell you that Wizards
are not the aforementioned part of the anatomy, by any means.
Palladium, on the other hand, do have that certain pungeant odour
about them, particularly Kev.
--
To those trying to get in touch with Mithrandir, do not email
to the Address in the header. It is borrowed, cause my newsfeed
has exploded.
Email:tke...@unix2.tcd.ie Thanks.
Art Urban
%In article <1993Mar8.1...@fsl.noaa.gov>, ur...@yoda.fsl.noaa.gov (Art Urban) writes...
%
%Well, it's certainly nice to hear unbiased examination of the issues here.
%I'd like to point out a few things:
If you read my post, you will find that I admited to stating *opinion*.
Your sarcasm is used inacurately; opinions are inherantly *biased*.
%
%1. Palladium, the "game-company-wannabe" you mention, is one of the largest
% game companies in the world. They were the first to introduce the softbound
% format for role-playing games which a lot of companies use (including WoTC).
Okay, good point. How about customer-oriented-wannabe? Their TSR mentality
is self-destructive and hurts their own customers, as well as potential
customers. I am unsure what you mean by softbound format, if you are in
fact refering to the cover & binding, whoopie (that's not a flame). Perfect
bound volumes have been around since paperback books.
%2. It may be disproportionate, overzealous, and even rude for Palladium to sue
% over this whole fiasco, but I feel that it was equally rude (at least) for
% WoTC to make use of trademarks without bothering to ask permission
% unless it was "convenient" for them.
True enough...
%3. At the same time, I am more than willing to concede that suing people for
% simply participating in the project is foolish, uncalled for, and will
% probably destroy Palladium's case if they attempt it, especially if the
% individuals in question are not making any money from TPO.
I sure hope your right.
%4. Does saying, "Gee, Wizards of the Coast is my favoritest game company in
% the whole world, so those mean Palladium people are stupid for not letting
% them use their trademarks" really contribute anything useful to the
% discussion?
A good question, really. I admit I reacted emotionally to the news, but,
what the heck, I'm human. In a sense, stating that they are a good/favorite
company in some way implies the character of a company. If 9 out of every
10 gamers you spoke to stated that they "really like" a particular company,
what might you be inclined to think about that company; good things or bad
things?
I happen to like WotC, and appreciate their products. I simply would hate
for a hulking company like Paladium to step on them. I wish Paladium had
offered more sincere options to WotC as a means of compensation. "You used
my name in vain; hand over your ears!"
Prob'ly 'nuff said...
Charles Perez
Now, I'm no lawyer, but the business and law sections of the bookstore have
umpteen thousand books that will tell you that just because you've
trademarked a term doesn't give you the right to it. It doesn't give the
Palladium game company the right to sue me for referring to it in a
conversation or for mentioning, in my own work, the chemical element of the
same name. All you get is the right not to have anyone else represent
himself as "Palladium Games" or whatnot. That's why you often see the
disclaimers that read, "Big Stink (tm) is a trademark of Effluvient
Fertilizer Games".
As for copyright infringement, it's been some months since I read the
little section of print where WotC tells how to integrate their system with
Palladium's. What part of any Palladium product was *plaigerized* to
produce this? The system? To my pea-sized brain, a game system is an
interlocking set of *concepts*, and every book on copyright basics *I've*
seen will tell you that you can't copyright concepts, only the *means of
their expression*. So, if you learn something from that copyrighted
computer manual you just read, the copyright holder holds *no* title to
that latest addition to the contents of your mind. Only the text and
graphics of the book are his.
Two last parting shots follow. First, Kevin, was it your lawyer who told
you to copyright your press releases (I didn't think of this point first -
which poster was that again?)? If you *want* some information spread
around by any means possible, for *free*, do you make as if to charge
royalties for it on top of free publicity? That's not only unprofessional,
that's *rude*. Secondly, Kevin, have you incorporated lately? If not, you
could run into trouble referring to yourself as a corporation. I don't
know about your state, but in my state, and in Delaware, incorporation is
no big deal (having a simple incorporation process is a gravy train for
many state treasuries, I understand - Delaware was first to catch on).
1000 pardons if you have indeed turned your business over to your
corporation.
Regards, Charles Perez
--
==========================================================================
That which is necessary is never evil. If an evil seems necessary, look
to your context; that's where its root lies.
ez03...@dale.ucdavis.edu
>I'd like to point out a few things:
>
> game companies in the world. They were the first to introduce the softbound
> format for role-playing games which a lot of companies use (including WoTC).
>
Umm, are you sure of this? Largest? Well large, but nowhere near SJG or
TSR in my mind, but I could be wrong. However the first to use softbound
books? Umm gee really? Is that why I have a softbound first edition Traveller
(well actually several, they came in many books) book. Or what about this
one, Bunnies and Burrows (copyright 1976 I believe that Palladium games came
a little later than that...) I could come up with several editions. Just
because TSR used hardback and boxed sets doesn't mean that everyone did before
Palladium did.
>2. It may be disproportionate, overzealous, and even rude for Palladium to sue
> over this whole fiasco, but I feel that it was equally rude (at least) for
> WoTC to make use of trademarks without bothering to ask permission
> unless it was "convenient" for them.
>
I got to agree here, well it wasn't AS bad, but a fairly stupid thing to do,
and a bit rude.
>3. At the same time, I am more than willing to concede that suing people for
> simply participating in the project is foolish, uncalled for, and will
> probably destroy Palladium's case if they attempt it, especially if the
> individuals in question are not making any money from TPO.
>
It is also probably nothing more than a rumor, until I see something from
Palladium saying this I'm not going to be suprised when we all discover that
Palladium never was going to do this apart from MAYBE a passing speculation.
And I stronly doubt the suit would stick.
>4. Does saying, "Gee, Wizards of the Coast is my favoritest game company in
> the whole world, so those mean Palladium people are stupid for not letting
> them use their trademarks" really contribute anything useful to the
> discussion?
>
Agreed, lets try to be a bit more reasonable about our discussions (on usenet?
can we?)
>
>In short, I feel that both companies in question have acted foolishly in this
>situation WoTC by not taking the trouble to get permission to use Palladium's
>trademarks, and Palladium for overreacting to the situation.
>
>
> --Ben
Ahhh, only sort of. WotC was a bit nieve (sp) however I think what they did
was not as bad as Palladium's reaction.
Anthony
----
.sig no work...sniff
Benjamin R Pierce
>In article <C3L93...@acsu.buffalo.edu> v124...@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Benjamin R Pierce) writes:
>>Well, it's certainly nice to hear unbiased examination of the issues here.
>>I'd like to point out a few things:
>>
>>1.Palladium, the "game-company-wannabe" you mention, is one of the largest
>> game companies in the world. They were the first to introduce the softbound
>> format for role-playing games which a lot of companies use (including WoTC).
>>
>
>Umm, are you sure of this? Largest? Well large, but nowhere near SJG or
>TSR in my mind, but I could be wrong. However the first to use softbound
>books? Umm gee really? Is that why I have a softbound first edition Traveller
>(well actually several, they came in many books) book. Or what about this
>one, Bunnies and Burrows (copyright 1976 I believe that Palladium games came
>a little later than that...) I could come up with several editions. Just
>because TSR used hardback and boxed sets doesn't mean that everyone did before
>Palladium did.
First edition Traveller and Bunnies and Burrows (both of which I also have)
were not softbound, they were stapled. Before Palladium, most games were
released in boxes, usually containing aforementioned stapled booklet, some
dice, and maybe a map or module. Softbound books (like Talislanta, f'rinstance,
or any of the Palladium books) came later. The only game I can think of
offhand which used a softbound format at around the same time as Palladium
was Tunnels and Trolls.
--Ben
P.S. I'm not sure of the exact figures, but Palladium is larger (in temrs of
money grossed) that you'd expect. Not as large as TSR, certainly, but I
would hazard a guess that it's larger than SJG, particularly considering
the financial troubles they've been having lately...
Bryant Durrell
>The only game I can think of
>offhand which used a softbound format at around the same time as Palladium
>was Tunnels and Trolls.
Let's have some dates here, please? Fifth Edition T&T was softbound,
and came out in...when?
And what does this have to do with the morality of the lawsuit,
anyhow?
--
Bryant Durrell dur...@chop.isca.uiowa.edu
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I feed on the flesh of the living, and I vote.
Solipsist at Large
debate. WotC can't use Copywritten material without permission,
but they can certainly base a work of theirs on what has gone before,
with proper attribution. In fact, as long as it is not a supplement
*specifically* for Palladium, they can avoid licensing problems. Hero
Games used to publish MSH conversions in Adventurer's Club, but no one
assumed there was anything other than a Derivative Work (and therefore
legal) issue being brought up.
--
Eric Alfred Burns "It is a tale
Solipsist at Large Told by an Idiot, full of sound and fury
"It's all in your mind" Signifying nothing."
IK2...@maine.maine.edu --Macbeth (V.v.26-8)