nuTSR/Wonderfilled? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Best Selling RPGs - Available Now @ DriveThruRPG.com
Status
Not open for further replies.
Roseblack said:
Hard to see why. They weren’t using it, it didn’t have positive associations for most people then or now, and there’s no universe in which a new TSR presents any sort of meaningful competition. A few small-timers claiming to be the “original” D&D studio online isn’t going to make a single difference to anything WotC/Hasbro actually cares about. The market dominance of the actual publishers of D&D is an order of magnitude above even established rpg publishers who have their shit together.

And even if this were a successor to the original TSR in some form, it’s debatable whether “having its shit together” was ever among the original company’s achievements.
Click to expand...

But they are using it. They still sale prior editions of DnD via DriveThruRpg. So yeah, it was important for them to keep up on the Trademark Name.
 
I hate to admit it, but while I wasn’t intrigued by the Kickstarter’s description of the game, I do like that Elmore art edition.
 
Doing a little research, this new TSR has "published for opposition" two other legacy Trademarks.

  • Star Frontiers.
  • Blackmoor
 
Endless Flight said:
I always liked Elmore’s line art more than his paintings. I haven’t seen anything by him I’ve liked since early second edition though.
Click to expand...
I’ve always been more a fan of his paintings than line art, but there was a spot b&w illustration he did for Dragon #114 that’s always been on my dream list of his art to own.
 
Acmegamer said:
But they are using it. They still sale prior editions of DnD via DriveThruRpg. So yeah, it was important for them to keep up on the Trademark Name.
Click to expand...
That’s not an actual use of trademark. It’s just something that happens to be on something they own the rights to. Also, sale of prior editions, while nice for consumers who want them, isn’t even a blip in their overall business. They don’t see it as having any relevance to their current brand identity, as evidenced by how difficult it was to get them to acknowledge that the more racially insensitive stuff from yesteryear might not be a good look for them now, and even then all they did was put a disclaimer on it.
 
Hasbro sort of has a history of letting tradmarks lapse anyway, some of which because they aren’t doing their due diligence. There have been a few occasions where they let G.I.Joe character trademarks expire so you would get Hawk, one of the thirteen original members in 1982, changing to Tomahawk in 2000.
 
Roseblack said:
That’s not an actual use of trademark. It’s just something that happens to be on something they own the rights to. Also, sale of prior editions, while nice for consumers who want them, isn’t even a blip in their overall business.
Click to expand...
Are you a trademark attorney? I ask because in my non attorney mind, it feels like they are using the trademark by continuing to sell those products. I'd ask my son while he is an attorney he's not a trademark attorney and honestly he's been too damn busy lately for me to feel like bothering.
 
Acmegamer said:
Are you a trademark attorney? I ask because in my non attorney mind, it feels like they are using the trademark by continuing to sell those products. I'd ask my son while he is an attorney he's not a trademark attorney and honestly he's been too damn busy lately for me to feel like bothering.
Click to expand...
One doesn’t need to be an attorney to know that in most jurisdictions trademark ownership requires active use of the trademark, as well as active defense of it against infringement and dilution (which costs time and money). Past use doesn’t count as active use. Since trademarks are only protected on the grounds that they’re important for brand identity and preventing counterfeit goods, companies can’t just purchase them and sit on them like they can with other forms of IP. I imagine the reason for that is because trademark conventions predate other forms of IP and copyright, going back to makers’ marks etc.

WotC could have continued using TSR as an imprint once it had dissolved the company (White Wolf has survived as an imprint after the dissolution of the company a couple of times now), but they preferred to build their own brand instead, which made sense at the time. By contrast, Hasbro has chosen to keep WotC as a subsidiary company and brand. But they never had any intention of continuing to put TSR on new products and pursue legal action against all perceived infringement and dilution, so they just didn’t bother. And once they stopped using it, it was only a matter of time before it stopped being their property.

Now, if somebody else hadn’t registered it, could they have revived it when they started selling pdfs? Probably, but I’m still not seeing why they’d want to. TSR isn’t a brand they want to build or maintain. There’s also no real chance of customer confusion here, as all the PDFs are clearly published by WotC and labeled as such. There’s no upside to chasing after a dead brand and no real threat from anyone else who happens to have revived it. If at any point the current owners of “TSR” said something misleading that related to the D&D IP, it would be much easier to go after them for that than to do anything about the TSR logo. Even stuff published under the OGL isn’t allowed to imply that they’re official D&D products.
 
Last edited:
I can’t blame Wizards for wanting to ditch the TSR name. It had been drug through the mud for a long time.
 
Roseblack said:
They don’t see it as having any relevance to their current brand identity, as evidenced by how difficult it was to get them to acknowledge that the more racially insensitive stuff from yesteryear might not be a good look for them now, and even then all they did was put a disclaimer on it.
Click to expand...
That's the most I would want them to do with it... no need to get all Disney with it and pretend it never happened.
 
According to New TSR's Twitter, they're rebooting Star Frontiers...
 
How would they be able to do anything with Star Frontiers when Wizards sells Star Frontiers products on DTRPG? Also, Hasbro never sells IP, so this would have to be a licensing deal if it’s true.
 
Honestly, whatever your feelings about the name and the validity of having a TSR publishing games involving one or two former staff, it's hard to deny that they have made an absolute pig's ear of this launch. Every forum and social media platform is full of utterly confused people.
 
BigJackBrass said:
Honestly, whatever your feelings about the name and the validity of having a TSR publishing games involving one or two former staff, it's hard to deny that they have made an absolute pig's ear of this launch. Every forum and social media platform is full of utterly confused people.
Click to expand...
Such as today, when they announced this on Facebook, and people were concerned it was going to use the Top Secret: NWO system.
 
Considering how protective Wizards of the Coast has been over the Star Frontiers IP, nuking all fan material, etc., I can't believe that TSR reached some sort of deal with them over it. If not, I expect WotC's lawyers to fully bury them, and then someone else can take up the name TSR in five years.
 
TSR is gone... dead... plastering that name/logo on something does not bring it back.
I feel somewhat the same about Chaosium... there is a company by that name, putting the logo on stuff, some of the people are even the same... but it's not the same and is never coming back.
Whatever love I had for it does not just follow the brand wherever it goes.
 
Well, we'll see if they understand Star Frontiers and keep the mechanics or try to innovate and waste the attempt. I mean, more Larry Elmore Star Frontiers art might be worth the price of admission either way.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Banner: The best cosmic horror & Cthulhu Mythos @ DriveThruRPG.com
Back
Top