Third Party Character Creation iOS App Removed

The d20 Fight Club for D&D 5th Edition iOS app has been removed from the Apple App Store by its creator at the request of WotC. The creator reports that he received a Cease & Desist demand (although it's worth noting that some supposed recent C&Ds appear to have turned out to be amicable requests). This follows on from the removal of the D&D Tools website and the more recent online character generator.

The creator reports that "I received a cease and desist order from Wizards of the Coast. All D&D apps will be removed from the App Store as they weren't compliant with WotC's copyrights and trademarks. Hopefully they'll be back in some form someday. Til then, thanks for all the support."

Nobody has actually shared one of these C&Ds yet, and others have indicated that what they actually received was simply a friendly email asking that they respect WotC's trademarks, so it's not entirely clear what is happening. Hopefully somebody will share one soon!

It does look like this particular app contained text and stat blocks copied directly from the D&D books. Below is the DM version of the app (the companion to the character creation app).

​

 

[Hussar]

Try selling something using JK Rowlings Potterverse material and see how long it lasts. Try selling novels set in Martin's Game of Thrones universe and see how long it lasts.

Let's not forget here, this wasn't free. This was a for profit activity. If you want to sell something using someone else's property you should bloody well ask first. End of story.

It utterly baffles me that people defend this sort of thing. This is pretty clear violation of copyright. Full stop. That's the end of the discussion right there. This isn't fanfic, this isn't some little guy being stepped on by The Man. This is flat out taking something that does not belong to you and selling it. There is no justification for this. Ever.

Look, I get that people want a character builder app, but this is not the way to get one. Quite obviously the D20 Fight Club owner did not have permission to do this. He went ahead and did it anyway. How is this possibly justifiable in any way?

 

[Sacrosanct]

No offense, but that's a crap argument. Some of these builders have been around for YEARS.

Not relevant to the point, or to the law

Nothing is being taken from you, for starters.

Patently false. Not only is his (or her) IP rights being taken, but also is the potential for him or her to profit off of his or her own creation. If he is unable to make a character generator now due to lack of funding (or any reason really) and someone else does. What happens down the road when he is able to make a generator? Things that cause a reduction in his ability to profit off his own creation include but are not limited by:

* an already established product that consumers have acquired so they won't need or want to buy his
* starting to compete in a market already firmly established by someone else
* an established precedence that anyone has free reign to do the same thing, flooding the market
* Additional costs to get out a product better than anyone else's that has already been established that wouldn't normally be assessed

"You" are not being hurt by these in the slightest, in fact you statistically will benefit.

Do you have a citation for this? Because I'm pretty sure something like "Book of Erotic Fantasy" didn't help the sales of D&D. In fact, I've seen it used by the anti-D&D crowd as an example of how it's such a horrible game. And as a creator? I can tell you I don't want someone using my material to put out garbage like that and getting my creations stained with such a reputation.

 

[Sunseeker]

Not relevant to the point, or to the law


Patently false. Not only is his (or her) IP rights being taken, but also is the potential for him or her to profit off of his or her own creation. If he is unable to make a character generator now due to lack of funding (or any reason really) and someone else does. What happens down the road when he is able to make a generator? Things that cause a reduction in his ability to profit off his own creation include but are not limited by:

* an already established product that consumers have acquired so they won't need or want to buy his
* starting to compete in a market already firmly established by someone else
* an established precedence that anyone has free reign to do the same thing, flooding the market
* Additional costs to get out a product better than anyone else's that has already been established that wouldn't normally be assessed



Do you have a citation for this? Because I'm pretty sure something like "Book of Erotic Fantasy" didn't help the sales of D&D. In fact, I've seen it used by the anti-D&D crowd as an example of how it's such a horrible game. And as a creator? I can tell you I don't want someone using my material to put out garbage like that and getting my creations stained with such a reputation.

I'm honestly not going to respond to people who cut up my posts like that.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Wait, what? I quoted the parts I was responding to in order to reduce confusion, so you knew exactly what I was replying to. What specifically is your issue in not responding to my counter points?

 

[Hussar]

There's the licensing issue to consider too. It seems to be common wisdom that WOTC is farming out a lot of it's work to other companies. Fine and dandy. Now, you're some software developer and WOTC approaches you to make a character builder. They want you to pay them a licensing fee and then you can sell your software.

Wouldn't your first question be, "Well, why would I pay you a licensing fee? These guys over here do it for free, why can't I?" Who in their right mind would pay for a license if they don't have to? And, why should they have to compete, after paying for the license, with another company that is doing the exact same thing but not paying for the license? Makes the license kinda worthless doesn't it?

So, [MENTION=93444]shidaku[/MENTION], THAT'S how this is taking money from WOTC.

 

[Sunseeker]

There's the licensing issue to consider too. It seems to be common wisdom that WOTC is farming out a lot of it's work to other companies. Fine and dandy. Now, you're some software developer and WOTC approaches you to make a character builder. They want you to pay them a licensing fee and then you can sell your software.

Wouldn't your first question be, "Well, why would I pay you a licensing fee? These guys over here do it for free, why can't I?" Who in their right mind would pay for a license if they don't have to? And, why should they have to compete, after paying for the license, with another company that is doing the exact same thing but not paying for the license? Makes the license kinda worthless doesn't it?

So, @shidaku, THAT'S how this is taking money from WOTC.

I already pointed out: sending out C&Ds when you're releasing your own products (or licensing them) is one thing. Sending out C&Ds with no clear intention of doing so is just bullying.

WOTC already declared their lack of intention to release their own tool when they canceled their licensed tool.

This is why I don't respond to people who chop up my posts, because it is almost universally a reaction to what you think I meant as opposed to what I actually wrote.

 

[lkj]

There's the licensing issue to consider too. It seems to be common wisdom that WOTC is farming out a lot of it's work to other companies. Fine and dandy. Now, you're some software developer and WOTC approaches you to make a character builder. They want you to pay them a licensing fee and then you can sell your software.

Wouldn't your first question be, "Well, why would I pay you a licensing fee? These guys over here do it for free, why can't I?" Who in their right mind would pay for a license if they don't have to? And, why should they have to compete, after paying for the license, with another company that is doing the exact same thing but not paying for the license? Makes the license kinda worthless doesn't it?

It does strike me that this is the most logical reason that they might be hunting down character creators right now. We can hope it is a sign that there will be an announcement of a licensing deal in the coming weeks. Less optimistically I suppose it could be the preliminaries to a negotiation. Least optimistically, it might be that they just happen to be getting around to people they feel are infringing and it has nothing to do with any deals or negotiations.

I guess we'll see.

AD

 

[Sacrosanct]

I already pointed out: sending out C&Ds when you're releasing your own products (or licensing them) is one thing. Sending out C&Ds with no clear intention of doing so is just bullying.

Again, patently false. You may think so, and apparently you do. But you have a clear misunderstanding of what copyright/trademark laws are and how they work.

This is why I don't respond to people who chop up my posts, because it is almost universally a reaction to what you think I meant as opposed to what I actually wrote.

I'm replying to what you are actually writing. If you mean something different, I can't be blamed for not being a mind reader and knowing you mean something other than what you wrote.

 

[Sunseeker]

Again, patently false. You may think so, and apparently you do. But you have a clear misunderstanding of what copyright/trademark laws are and how they work.

Legal and ethical are not the same thing.

D&D is a system supported by fans. You piss your fans off, your product takes a dive. We don't need it to get to work. We don't need it to fill our bellies. But they do need us to make money.

 

[Dausuul]

I'm just surprised it took so long. I downloaded Fight Club a couple months ago to have a look, and it was blatantly infringing; huge chunks of text straight out of the rulebooks.

I understand the desire to get some decent digital tools for 5E, and I'll be the first to say WotC continues to fail utterly at digital. But it's not at all unreasonable for them to defend their copyright.