# So what posts here does WotC have a problem with?



## thedungeondelver (Apr 30, 2010)

From Morrus' twitter:

"Eeek. WotC has its lawyers send us letters about member posts now? I   miss The Rouse!"


----------



## weem (Apr 30, 2010)

Yea, I saw that and was wondering myself.


----------



## Morrus (Apr 30, 2010)

I'll not point anything out directly, but there was a large amount of WotC's IP (direct from the books) posted.  It has been dealt with.

(Oh, and moved to Meta!)


----------



## ExploderWizard (Apr 30, 2010)

I don't follow twitter, use facebook or myspace. Splain for those of us with lives.


----------



## Dice4Hire (Apr 30, 2010)

I would guess:

Any torrent ones mentioning WOTC in the same breath    (oops, I did it)

Ones posting things verbatim from DDI or elsewhere

General anti-WOTC hater posts and posters (and we have a lot on this site)






5e    (I had to say it, a moratorium on these would make me happy)



Nothing much important, overall, I would guess, and things the mods here already watch carefully.


----------



## Alzrius (Apr 30, 2010)

Well, that's certainly unnerving.

I'm no lawyer, but I'm trying to imagine what sort of post could possibly cause WotC's legal department to send EN World a letter. I'm guessing one of these:

*1) Libel* - Someone wrote something nasty about WotC that they _really_ didn't like.

*2) Reproduced rules* - Too much of a rule or rulebook was quoted in a post, or multiple posts.

*3) Messing with their stuff* - Maybe somebody discussed how to modify DDI files, or something similar that WotC sees as an action that could threaten their profits, albeit remotely.

That's all I can think of, but I'm sure there's something else that might have ruffled their feathers.

*EDIT:* Ninja'd by Morrus! ...and it was #2!


----------



## Odhanan (Apr 30, 2010)

Took a screenshot for people wondering:


----------



## thedungeondelver (Apr 30, 2010)

Morrus said:


> I'll not point anything out directly, but there was a large amount of WotC's IP (direct from the books) posted.  It has been dealt with.
> 
> (Oh, and moved to Meta!)




AH.  Not cool.

Okay then!  The twitter was a tad...dramatic.


----------



## Morrus (Apr 30, 2010)

thedungeondelver said:


> AH. Not cool.
> 
> Okay then! The twitter was a tad...dramatic.




No, it's just that I used to get a friendly email from The Rouse or someone rather than a letter from a lawyer.  I just mentioned I missed the old approach.  Not a big deal at all.


----------



## thedungeondelver (Apr 30, 2010)

Morrus said:


> No, it's just that I used to get a friendly email from The Rouse or someone rather than a letter from a lawyer.  I just mentioned I missed the old approach.  Not a big deal at all.





Hey, I'm with you 100% though.  I know what kind of webforum _I_ run.  If somebody put whole swaths of 1e books up?  Man I'd kill those posts without flinching.  Doubly so if WotC sent the stark fist of removal.

(I never got communiques from The Rouse at any rate)

Well best of luck man.


----------



## Fifth Element (Apr 30, 2010)

I think we all miss the Rouse.


----------



## francisca (Apr 30, 2010)

Morrus said:


> I'll not point anything out directly, but there was a large amount of WotC's IP (direct from the books) posted.  It has been dealt with.
> 
> (Oh, and moved to Meta!)




That sucks.


----------



## Odhanan (Apr 30, 2010)

Fifth Element said:


> I think we all miss the Rouse.



I don't.


----------



## MichaelSomething (Apr 30, 2010)

Fifth Element said:


> I think we all miss the Rouse.




Well you can always follow his twitter account or his website for your daily douse of Rouse.


----------



## Jack99 (Apr 30, 2010)

Fifth Element said:


> I think we all miss the Rouse.



This!


Odhanan said:


> I don't.



There is no accounting for (bad) taste 

May we inquire as to the kind of letter? Was it a so-called cease or desist letter? Or more of a friendly (or not so friendly) request to remove things?


----------



## El Mahdi (Apr 30, 2010)

deleted


----------



## Thornir Alekeg (Apr 30, 2010)

I just noticed in the "This PDF cover has to be seen" thread in General, that the pictures of the AD&D Monster Manual cover are no longer showing up.  Could be that was the item that brought the attention.


----------



## jaerdaph (Apr 30, 2010)

Thornir Alekeg said:


> I just noticed in the "This PDF cover has to be seen" thread in General, that the pictures of the AD&D Monster Manual cover are no longer showing up.  Could be that was the item that brought the attention.




Somehow, I don't think so.  

It's far more likely the owner of the site hosting the pics got annoyed they were being off site linked. 

It sounds like a case of some overzealous posting of WotC book content and these references were removed.

Edit: plus the picture is showing up again.


----------



## Sammael (Apr 30, 2010)

Thornir Alekeg said:


> I just noticed in the "This PDF cover has to be seen" thread in General, that the pictures of the AD&D Monster Manual cover are no longer showing up.  Could be that was the item that brought the attention.



Book covers are pretty much always fair use.


----------



## Fifth Element (Apr 30, 2010)

Odhanan said:


> I don't.



Yes, but I *think *that we all miss him. That's all that matters.


----------



## Obryn (Apr 30, 2010)

I'm going to guess some stuff in the Fan Creations forums - like homemade power cards and the like.  Or were those taken down in the last wave?

I really have no idea, though. 

-O


----------



## Piratecat (Apr 30, 2010)

Obryn said:


> I'm going to guess some stuff in the Fan Creations forums - like homemade power cards and the like.  Or were those taken down in the last wave?



Bingo! We missed an old one*, and they flagged it.

We have a pretty good relationship with wotc_trevor (Trevor Kidd), WotC's Community Manager; he has the fun parts of The Rouse's old job. Looks like the link they asked us about went straight to legal without passing through brand management first. That happens - not a big deal. We've never allowed pirated IP here, and our relationship is a cordial one.

 - PCat

* Ithaqua, as it turns out.


----------



## Odhanan (Apr 30, 2010)

Fifth Element said:


> Yes, but I *think *that we all miss him. That's all that matters.



To you? Sure. OK.


----------



## Pyske (May 3, 2010)

I looks like Grampa's Power Cards were removed as well (fair enough), but also the Powerpoint *template* (which didn't have the copyrighted text in it).  Were the icons considered IP, or was this just assumed to be the same thing in a different format?  If the latter, would it be permissible for someone to re-post the template?


----------



## Piratecat (May 3, 2010)

I didn't see the original template, but if Morrus removed it the icons were probably IP.


----------

