WotC shot down a Stardew Valley mod "Baldur's Village"?!

[Bagpipe]

Hoping this does indeed turn out to be an oversight but if not then imo that is a real ♥♥♥♥ move from WotC to go after a mod which has been so passionately and extensively created.
Hoping more folks can jump on and tell them how they feel about that sort of overreaching abuse of the gaming community who like nothing more than gaming and being creative!

If anything, the mod may actually turn some SV players on to BG if they have not already played right?

I mean...apart from what I have just wrote I am pretty speechless that their lawyers would hit a damn mod with a DMCA takedown order.

[Dank Sidious]

They hired a private military force to go after a guy who got some magic cards he wasn't supposed to have. Nothing they do leaves me speechless at this point

[Underdark Knight]

Let's hope it was a mistake, because what a dumbass move.

[Moonbane]

https://www.pcgamer.com/games/rpg/swen-vincke-says-fan-mods-shouldnt-be-treated-like-commercial-ventures-that-infringe-on-your-property-just-hours-before-wizards-of-the-coast-retracts-its-bg3-stardew-mod-takedown/

"The Baldur’s Village DMCA takedown was issued mistakenly—we are sorry about that," the WoTC spokesperson wrote. "We are in the process of fixing that now so fans and the Stardew community can continue to enjoy this great mod!"

[Butcher]

Originally posted by Moonbane:

https://www.pcgamer.com/games/rpg/swen-vincke-says-fan-mods-shouldnt-be-treated-like-commercial-ventures-that-infringe-on-your-property-just-hours-before-wizards-of-the-coast-retracts-its-bg3-stardew-mod-takedown/

"The Baldur’s Village DMCA takedown was issued mistakenly—we are sorry about that," the WoTC spokesperson wrote.

I wonder if anyone believes it was "issued mistakenly" or even better - that they are sorry about that.

[Sentient_Toaster]

Trademark laws can be a bit fiddly and companies vary a lot in how aggressively they push back against anything that looks like it might be infringing, or how willing they are to authorize non-commercial mods etc. Hasbro's been fairly aggressive in general, such as in their highly controversial and eventually rescinded effort to modify the OGL in ways that put users of it at significantly greater risk.

[Captain_Narol]

That's the problem when you use external agencies to watch over your IP properties, they tend to be overzealed...

At least Hasbro aknowledged it was a mistake and seems willing to fix things.

[Mike Garrison]

Sometimes the IP lawyers and the PR Department have to get together in one room and argue about whose issues are more important.

Looks like this time the PR Department won the argument.

[Bagpipe]

Wow, that is a huge relief to see they are at least back tracking and that it may indeed have been lawyers getting ahead of themselves.
I can't help feel like lawyers shouldn't be able to issue demands on behalf of a company without the companies prior consent on a per case basis but then that may mean some CEO actually has to do something and/or answer the phone occasionally so I guess that's why it is how it is.

[Mountain King]

Originally posted by Maron:

I think they jumped on the name "Baldur's Village". However, what's trademarked in their name is "Baldur's Gate". Not even the single "Baldur" is trademarked to them (but it is to other companies that have nothing to do with gaming).

The characters are licensed for modding, so that's out of the table.
The mod doesn't recreate any place/map that belongs to WotC, so that's also out of the table.
The mod doesn't recreate any of BG3's story, so that's out of the table.

TL;DR - WoTC tried to do another "OGL change" because of a partial name that isn't even trademarked to them, and lost.

It adds characters from BG3 that they do own the rights to. You know you don't have to comment if you don't understand the topic.

[Mike Garrison]

Originally posted by Maron:

Not even the single "Baldur" is trademarked to them (but it is to other companies that have nothing to do with gaming).

Baldr (aka Balder, Baldur) is a Norse god, so there are probably a fair number things that use that name.

[Bagpipe]

Originally posted by Mountain King:

Originally posted by Maron:

I think they jumped on the name "Baldur's Village". However, what's trademarked in their name is "Baldur's Gate". Not even the single "Baldur" is trademarked to them (but it is to other companies that have nothing to do with gaming).

The characters are licensed for modding, so that's out of the table.
The mod doesn't recreate any place/map that belongs to WotC, so that's also out of the table.
The mod doesn't recreate any of BG3's story, so that's out of the table.

TL;DR - WoTC tried to do another "OGL change" because of a partial name that isn't even trademarked to them, and lost.

It adds characters from BG3 that they do own the rights to. You know you don't have to comment if you don't understand the topic.

You know you don't have to comment, and in doing so ping me, if you just wanna insult and argue...

[★REM★]

WoTC is a joke, always been.
Why are you surprised by how they manage .. everything?

[hannibal_pjv]

Copyright issues can be tricky!
That is why any mod that use ”official” D&D material is possible to need shoot down any day!
Home made classes, spells and character… are good to go, but if there are parts of commercilly available content…. It is different matter.

[Mike Garrison]

Originally posted by Maron:

Originally posted by Mountain King:

It adds characters from BG3 that they do own the rights to. You know you don't have to comment if you don't understand the topic.

Thanks for showing you don't know how to read or know what OGL is.
You can go talk to the hand now.

What are you even talking about? The OGL only licenses the game system. It doesn't give away anything specific like the Forgotten Realms setting, the BG3 characters, or anything like that.

The OGL specifically does NOT give away:

product and product line names, logos and identifying marks including trade dress; artifacts; creatures characters; stories, storylines, plots, thematic elements, dialogue, incidents, language, artwork, symbols, designs, depictions, likenesses, formats, poses, concepts, themes and graphic, photographic and other visual or audio representations; names and descriptions of characters, spells, enchantments, personalities, teams, personas, likenesses and special abilities; places, locations, environments, creatures, equipment, magical or supernatural abilities or effects, logos, symbols, or graphic designs; and any other trademark or registered trademark

That is all retained as owned IP.

[Popsicles]

So WotC should just let everyone use their IP?

Can you use the NFL logo anyway you want?
Can you use Harry Potter characters in your video game?

I find it comical that so many don't understand IP. WotC doesn't owe anyone anything when it comes to using their material.