From: [m--v--a] at [cpac.washington.edu] (Peter D. Adkison) Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc Subject: Another round of Palladium v. WotC NNTP-Posting-Host: bailey.cpac.washington.edu most of today reading the archives of the usenet posts made while I was gone. Thank you, Sea Wasp, for being kind enough to archive them and pass 'em along. Hopefully I haven't missed any. I quickly figured out that there was far to much to go through and quote/comment on in traditional usenet fashion. So I simply started taking notes and will hopefully address the major points. First of all, and most importantly, I apologize for the inflamatory nature of my comments on the press release by Palladium Books and Kevin Siembieda. Some of the comments I made were uncalled for and certainly did nothing to lend credence to Wizards of the Coast's position. I let my emotions get the best of me. But I'm back into Vulcan mode now, so hopefully that won't happen again. Second, I want to underscore the fact that Kevin Siembieda and Palladium Books have only *threatened* to sue netters and authors in The Primal Order. No actual new lawsuits have developed and it is entirely possible that they were never seriously contemplating doing that in the first place, but were only trying to apply additional pressure against us to settle the case out of court. Third, someone mentioned that perhaps Wizards of the Coast did not act responsibly by involving netters in something that they could get sued over. It never entered my mind that netters could get sued over this, but if they do, Wizards of the Coast will attempt to bear the expense of their defense. Fourth, some questioned the value of integration notes in the first place. If you ever get a chance to stop by our office I can point out to you the box of letters we've received, many of which praise the integration notes as extremely valuable. While I understand why some GMs wouldn't need them, many GMs do find them helpful. Fifth, please lets keep this conversation civil? I don't appreciate myself or my staff or my company being referred to as "smelling like assholes," and I even actually become somewhat embarassed when I hear people refer to Palladium Books or Kevin Siembieda in such derogatory terms as well. It does seem to me that Kevin Siembieda's actions to date against various members of the gaming industry collectively indicate a very damaging trend, and this concerns me and I think should concern us all. But Mr. Siembieda does have a right to take this situation to court (that's not an admission of guilt, just an admission of his rights), and if Wizards of the Coast goes bankrupt trying to protect itself, then the United States legal system is as much to blame as anything else. Sixth, some of you have questioned whether or not this is worth discussing here, or worth the bandwidth being dedicated to it. I certainly think it is. It ranks right up there with the Secret Service raid on Steve Jackson Games and the lead ban in New York as far as important litigation involving the roleplaying industry. Your comments posted here are read by myself, and many of them influence me to some degree or another. Given my role in this case, that means that your posts are having an indirect effect on this as well. This case stands a good chance of being a precedent-setting case for copyright and trademark law in the roleplaying industry. Seventh, I noticed at least one offer of financial assistance. I'd be a fool to turn this down since much more is at stake then my pride. Write private e-mail if you're interested in discussing this farther. Eighth, someone asked if arbitration was possible. In Thurseday's GAMA board meeting I was given an opportunity to explain this situation to GAMA and Mike Pondsmith, president of R. Talsorian Games, offerred to try and arbitrate. Most of the people at the meeting told him not to bother, that Mr. Siembieda was way too irrational and couldn't be reasoned with, but Mr. Pondsmith said he had experienced some degree of success in dealing with Mr. Siembieda in the past and thought it was worth the effort. I support Mr. Pondsmith wholeheartedly and I met with him afterword to explain that I would be open to meeting each of Palladium's demands, except signing an admission of guilt. Ninth, last but not least, is this issue of whether or not we were rude/unethical/jerks/whatever for not asking permission to publish integration notes for various systems. I'll admit that I don't have a good defense against this criticism. I'll try and explain best I can what was going through my mind back in those days, and hopefully you'll at least be empathetic enough to at least realize that we're not assholes and were basically simply naive. Each of the following points contributed to the overall decision to not go out and ask companies for permission to do integration notes: * We didn't need permission. Asking a company for permission to do integration notes would be like being 25 years old, living on your own, and asking your mom if you can ask someone out on a date. The thought of asking companies for permission to do something, when I know I don't need their permission, makes my stomach churn. Just by asking for permission you're sort of admitting you need permission. * I honestly didn't think it was that big a deal. I figured if we gave credit where credit was do, didn't approach it with an in-your-face attitude (like Mayfair does with its RoleAids line), printed company addresses, and so forth that no one would really care. Sure, some people like Steffan O'Sullivan told me that some companies would care, but I didn't believe that they really would. Sure, now that tens of thousands of dollars and major bad press is on the line it's a really big deal, but back then it was just one of hundreds of decisions that I as an executive made in running this company. * I was afraid that in asking for permission, many companies might not take the time to carefully look at what we were doing, would think at first glance that we were just looking for a free license, and would say "no" right off the bat. Then the asking of permission would leave me in the awkward position of designing a product with integration notes, and either not having any integration notes to put in it, or putting in integration notes when the companies had already told me not to. If you don't ask, then at least they can't say no. * Our attorney recommended against it. Again, by asking for permission you're sorta admitting you need it, and if you print the integration notes after they've said "no," you'll *really* piss them off. * Our attorney assurred us that printing the integration notes without permission was legally and ethically okay. So, we didn't ask most companies for permission, and didn't contact them for comment. I won't say we were wrong, and I don't think we were wrong, but, like Monte Cook of ICE said, perhaps we committed a "faux paux." A naive mistake that is certainly going to cost us dearly. We've learned, and while I still think our position in this is correct and I refuse to sign a statement admitting otherwise, from now on we will only print integration notes for products that provide us written permission to do so. --Mavra! Peter D. Adkison Janitor, Wizards of the Coast [m--v--a] at [wizards.com] The above internet address should be used for e-mail if it is different from the e-mail address in the header.