Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Erik Jameson <erikj@****.COM>
Subject: Re: WotC's CCG patent and FASA (Was - Re: Tinner's Pompous
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 12:27:00 -0500
At 12:34 AM 3/17/98 -0500, you wrote:
>>> So have FASA, and all the other companies printing CCGs licensed the idea
>>> from WotC?
>>
>>FASA has not licensed Garfield's patent. (I suspect they cut a deal
>>somehow, as WotC maintains the Battletech CCG for them. No use screwing
>>a guy over if he can screw you back, right?)
>>
>>To my knowledge, only two or three independent (non-WotC-related)
>>companies have licensed the patent; none of them come close to being top
>>ten.
>
>Just to clarify this issue.
>WotC has NOT patented the CCG.
>
>What they patented was the unique elements Garfield designed for MtG.
>These include "Tapping" (turning) cards to indicate their use, and the
>unique resources management elements of "Play one resource(land) per turn.
>These things are legally, the intellectual property of WotC, and they have
>every right to protect them and profit from their use - Look at a LOT of the
>first wave of copycat CCG's - Over the Edge being a prime example - all they
>did was change the wording around, and essentially stole MtG's rules system.
>
>FASA has not purchased a lisence from WotC for the SRTCG, because AFAIK they
>are NOT using any of these unique elements.
>
>

Actually, I would contend that the SRTCG does include some elements of
M:tG, such as card turning and the mana/nuyen point system. Apparently,
Wizards of the Coast agrees with that assessment.

WotC asked/demanded? that the CCG companies sign licensing agreements with
them by the end of 1997. Here's the scorecard:

Of the leading CCG manufacturers, only one, Harper/Prism which makes the
Aliens/Predator and the Imajica CCGs, has signed on. WotC either designed
or owns the publisher for Battletech, Dune and L5R.

Middle Earth (ICE), Overpower (Fleer/Skybox), Star Wars (Decipher), Star
Trek:TNG (Decipher), Warlords (ICE) and Shadowrun (FASA) have all declined
to sign licensing agreements with Wizards of the Coast. This could be for
any number of reasons, most likely being that these companies believe that
they have solid legal footing.

I am unaware of any potential consequences or any further legal challenge
from WotC. Maybe one of our FASA moles could find out if there is anything
else going on?

Erik J.
Message no. 2
From: --=cHipHeaD=-- <chiphead@****.COM>
Subject: Re: WotC's CCG patent and FASA (Was - Re: Tinner's Pompous
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 18:29:27 -0500
> >
> >What they patented was the unique elements Garfield designed for MtG.
> >These include "Tapping" (turning) cards to indicate their use, and the
> >unique resources management elements of "Play one resource(land) per turn.
> >These things are legally, the intellectual property of WotC, and they have
> >every right to protect them and profit from their use - Look at a LOT of the
> >first wave of copycat CCG's - Over the Edge being a prime example - all they
> >did was change the wording around, and essentially stole MtG's rules system.

Just because the patent included "Tapping" to indicate use, it doesnt
mean they have the actual physical movements of turning a card
patented..why would a rule saying you have to turn a card to show it is
equiped/in use be a violation? its common sense...of course, i doubt the
patent office allows that ;)

> Actually, I would contend that the SRTCG does include some elements of
> M:tG, such as card turning and the mana/nuyen point system. Apparently,
> Wizards of the Coast agrees with that assessment.

Umm...Didn't society in general invent the rules of a trading system? I
mean, i dont know exactly how the nuyen point system works, but how can
a company like WoTC lay claim to a set of mathematical equations, which
is essentially what their mana system consists of, that have already
been created and are already used by others? (even though not in the
same order...i dont think the patent office would let me patent a^2 +
b^2 = c^2...would they?? if so, im gonna go do it now and start suing
the hell out of every math book maker and every mathematician for using
my PATENTED system..) This said, wouldn't the SRTCG just be using basic
math for its nuyen point system?just a perspective..feel free to point
out my errors and stupidity.

Have a nice day.
Help the world, kill more pedestrians...
Unless of course they have a really big gun. Then shoot 'em with your
hood mounted autocannon..

--
`sNake

---_+-----------_____+++__+_+__-----------
GeeK c0de? I doNt need no stinking geeK ©()d¢
-___+++_+_+______+_------++--------------

PleAse excuse my idiotic babBLe.
http://www.jax-inter.net/users/snakeyes
Message no. 3
From: Robert Watkins <robert.watkins@******.COM>
Subject: Re: WotC's CCG patent and FASA (Was - Re: Tinner's Pompous
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 09:46:26 +1000
--=cHipHead=-- writes:
>Just because the patent included "Tapping" to indicate use, it doesnt
>mean they have the actual physical movements of turning a card
>patented..why would a rule saying you have to turn a card to show it is
>equiped/in use be a violation? its common sense...of course, i doubt the
>patent office allows that ;)


Beware of what the patent office would allow. There was a guy in California
a couple of years back who successfully patented the concept of the
electronic calendar laid out like a normal calendar: e.g.
---------------
|S|M|T|W|T|F|S|
---------------
|1|2|3|4|5|6|7|
---------------
...
and so on. With the aid of that patent, he laid a claim for royalties
against most of the software industry. The patent was eventually overturned
by the court, but the patent office did say it was valid.

(This was reported in Doctor Dobb's Journal (December issue, not April) a
couple of years ago... I haven't checked up on it, but I presume it's true).

One of the key elements in a patent case, though, is the question of wether
or not the concepts were in common use at the time of the patent (that's why
the calendar example above failed, and why you couldn't patent, say, a
wordprocessor as a concept, or a spreadsheet (just ask the maker of
VisiCalc)). If WotC waited until there were other games using the concepts,
then their argument might be legally shaky.

--
.sig deleted to conserve electrons robert.watkins@******.com

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about WotC's CCG patent and FASA (Was - Re: Tinner's Pompous, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!