The Hotness
Games|People|Company
Dominion: Dark Ages
Total War
Mage Knight: Board Game
Fantastiqa
Libertalia
The Lord of the Rings: Nazgul
Descent: Journeys in the Dark (Second Edition)
Eclipse
Mice and Mystics
Doctor Who: The Card Game
Lords of Waterdeep
Star Wars: X-Wing Miniatures Game
Agricola: All Creatures Big and Small
Dungeon Fighter
Android: Netrunner
Virgin Queen
A Game of Thrones: The Board Game (Second Edition)
Glory to Rome
Infiltration
Collapsible D: The Final Minutes of the Titanic
Dominion
The Lord of the Rings: The Card Game
Twilight Struggle
City of Horror
Snowdonia
1989: Dawn of Freedom
Goa
Sherlock Holmes Consulting Detective
Agricola
Among the Stars
7 Wonders: Cities
7 Wonders
The Swarm
Through the Ages: A Story of Civilization
Arkham Horror
Village
Ora et Labora
Battles of Westeros: House Baratheon Army Expansion
Race for the Galaxy
War of the Ring
Trajan
Kingdom Builder
The Castles of Burgundy
Zombicide
Twilight Imperium (third edition)
Space Alert
Dungeon Command: Sting of Lolth
Hacienda
Battlestar Galactica
Ground Floor

BoardGameGeek News

To submit news, a designer diary, outrageous rumors, or other material, please contact BGG News editor W. Eric Martin via email – wericmartin AT gmail.com
Recommend
130 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up

Fantasy Flight Games' Line-up for January 2012 – and Beyond, Possibly All the Way to Venus

W. Eric Martin
United States
Apex
North Carolina
flag msg tools
admin
Avatar
U.S. publisher Fantasy Flight Games sent out its January 2012 release schedule on Oct. 17, two days before the opening of Spiel 2011, and I'm only now unpacking that list and updating the BGG database with all the images and info. It's tough to get back in the groove sometimes...

Compared to its Dec. 2011 offerings, FFG's 1/2012 release list is tiny, with the only standalone game being a new edition of Nexus Ops from designer Charlie Catino, the cover of which was included (perhaps by mistake?) among FFG's December 2011 solicitations. In addition to a clarified rulebook and new detailed non-glowing plastic figures, FFG promises that this new edition of Nexus Ops "includes a range of optional variants, including King of the Hill mode, the deadly Vortex, and even a full set of alternate unit powers!"

Other items due out January 2012 from FFG include the usual assortment of Living Card Game expansions:
-----A Game of Thrones: The Card Game - Where Loyalty Lies
-----Call of Cthulhu: The Card Game - Shadow of the Monolith
-----The Lord of the Rings: The Card Game - The Redhorn Gate
-----Warhammer: Invasion - The Imperial Throne

And two more expansions for the ever-growing world of Dust Tactics:
-----Dust Tactics: "Action Jackson / The Priest / Johnny One-Eye" - Allies Hero Pack
-----Dust Tactics: "Stefan / Totenmeister / Grenadier X" - Axis Hero Pack

And then there's this:


A new edition of Merchant of Venus, which was announced separately on October 21, 2011 – only one day after Stronghold Games had announced its new edition of Merchant of Venus. How did two editions of the same game come about? Stronghold Games had signed a deal with designer Richard Hamblen, while according to the game announcement on FFG's website, Fantasy Flight Games "signed an exclusive licensing contract with Wizards of the Coast, LLC, a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc." (Also on October 21, 2011, Wizards of the Coast filed for trademark in the U.S. for the name "Merchant of Venus".)

Naturally a fair amount of confusion over which company really has the rights to publish a new version of MoV has been in the air since these twin announcements, and both companies have held their ground as to whether they have the rights. Here's FFG CEO Christian T. Petersen in that same news announcement:

Quote:
Dear "Merchant of Venus" fans,

Like yourselves, I am saddened by the confusion and issue that has arisen in the publishing-rights for Merchant of Venus (MoV) between Stronghold Games and ourselves, an issue that surely was uninvited by either side.

More than a year ago, FFG signed a deal with Hasbro for the right to re-publish MoV. Since then, we have been worked towards republishing the title with great excitement and dilligence. The artwork, graphic design, game and production development of our version of MoV is among the best FFG has done to-date, and we had been looking forward to making our official MoV announcement early next month. It was our intention to publish the new MoV in March 2012 (which remains our plan, discovery of this unfortunate issue notwithstanding).

As a significant part of our royalties to Hasbro for MoV sales were specifically stipulated as going to the designer (i.e. Mr. Richard Hamblen), we have no reason to believe that he was not fully aware of our MoV republishing project. We have nothing but the greatest respect for Mr. Hamblen and his creations (Magic Realm was my first personal Avalon Hill board game purchase) and I'm hopeful, despite these issues, that his work again will see the light of day and that he'll be rewarded for his innovation once more.

I also have the greatest respect for Stronghold Games, and I've seen no reason to believe they've been acting in bad faith in their endeavors. It is unfortunate such an issue should disrupt their publishing plans, as it is unfortunate it has disrupted ours.

That said, FFG has every reason to believe the MoV rights licensed to us by Hasbro are true and correctly given. I hope that you, the MoV fan, can understand and appreciate our desire to publish a game on which we have been working in good faith for a substantial period of time with great expense, and for which we have the rights.

We are in open communication with both Hasbro and Stronghold on this, and will be digging into more details next week to clarify the issue. I'm hopeful that all parties are reasonable and that a mutual desire to see MoV in print again will not cause the game to get stuck in long dispute.

Thank you for your patience in this delicate matter.

Best Wishes,

Christian T. Petersen
CEO
Fantasy Flight Games

And the corresponding statement from Stronghold Games, posted on BGG:

Quote:
It has come to our attention that Fantasy Flight Games has laid claim to the license for the reprint of "Richard Hamblen's Merchant of Venus".

First and foremost, Stronghold Games bears no ill will towards Fantasy Flight Games over what can only be deemed as an unfortunate situation. In fact, we remain fans of Fantasy Flight's work within the game industry.

However, over 18 months ago, we began negotiations with Mr Hamblen for the license to his game design, Merchant of Venus, finally signing an agreement recently. After much research, Stronghold Games feels very strongly that the license is solely Mr. Hamblen's to offer, and he has selected Stronghold Games for the reprint.

In our opinion, the party that has sold the license to Fantasy Flight Games does not own the rights to this license. Mr Hamblen has also expressed to us his firm belief that the license is his alone to offer.

At this time, we are intent upon defending our and Mr Hamblen's claim to this license, noting once again that we view Fantasy Flight in the highest regard and regret that they have been put into this position.

Kevin Nesbitt and Stephen Buonocore
Managing Directors
Stronghold Games LLC

Stronghold Games has supposedly negotiated with Michael Christopher (BGG user Dathkadan) to use his graphic design in its version of Merchant of Venus, but nothing official has been announced. (Given the conflicting game announcements, focusing on artwork would be a tad "cart before the horse" in any case.)

More details on what's coming from whom once the Venusian dust settles...
Twitter Facebook
85 Comments
Subscribe sub options Tue Nov 1, 2011 6:30 am
Post Comment
Colorcrayons
United States
Crystal
Minnesota
flag msg tools
Avatar
Shame about Nexus Ops not being available before christmas.
It would have been an excellent family game gift idea to play on christmas day. Short enough to be playable and allow other fun holiday activities without dominating the day to play it.

It's also a shame there isn't more info provided regarding what has changed in the new edition. Scattered Rubium is a definite change to the dynamic even though it's a somewhat subtle change. Perhaps the FFG version of that card will work better in games of 4 people.

I won't comment on MoV since I am sure this thread will be dominated by speculative posts on that subject, even though hundreds of posts have speculated about that topic to death already.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 6:56 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Curt Carpenter
United States

Washington
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I have to say, those are two class act responses from FFG and Stronghold.

(And no, I'm not being sarcastic for a change. I'm just trying it out, to see how it feels.)
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 7:34 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Laughing Cow Cheese

Spokane
Washington
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Those are classy responses.
38 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 8:31 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Paul Beasi
United States
Easthampton
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I have my own preference for which company makes the reprint of MoV, but no matter how you look at it, one of the two companies got royally screwed since I'm sure both thought they were acquiring the license from the true holder. Heck, even both of the potential license holders may honestly believe they hold the license they sold.

So who do I want to make the reprint? Not important. Who SHOULD make the reprint? Whoever holds the valid license. I guess time will tell who that will be.
14 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Edited Tue Nov 1, 2011 8:53 am
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 8:46 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Seth Brown
United States
North Adams
Massachusetts
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Seriously, given some of the acrimonious mudslinging I've seen between companies before, it's nice to see two game companies being respectful of each other even in the face of a thorny conflict over publishing rights. I applaud them both for taking the high road; makes me feel like these companies are both run by people who care about gaming, which in turn makes me want to acquire more games by both of them.

...and I'm hoping neither of them says anything nasty a few days from now and retroactively makes me look like an idiot for posting this comment.
52 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 8:48 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Japan

Tokushima
flag msg tools
Most language free systems aren't this clear, or easy to learn! Awesome!
badge
I'm back, and ER is STILL #1 in my book!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Unfortunate corporate versus creator ownership vibe; publishers just doing their thing and having the license pulled out from under them. Ah! Lawyers now coming out for the tractor pull, and look at the mud flying on the side-lines. Unfortunate, indeed.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 9:17 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Chris Geggus
United Kingdom
Brentwood,
Essex
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb

Agree with previous comments and also hope this can be resolved without legal threat, action etc. which benefits no-one other than the lawyers.

However - just noted on the box art " For 2 - 4 Players ". What happened to the normal and long loved 6 players? Restricting to 4 players may make for a different game. Anyone know the thinking behind this?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 10:34 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
David Knepper
United States
Huntsville
Alabama
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Ahiksking wrote:
However - just noted on the box art " For 2 - 4 Players ". What happened to the normal and long loved 6 players? Restricting to 4 players may make for a different game. Anyone know the thinking behind this?



The mandatory Fantasy Flight Games expansion or two. surprise
34 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 10:45 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
William Roop
United States
Mendon
Michigan
mbmbmbmbmb
I could ALMOST see it unfolding something like this:

Hasbro contacts Mr. Hamblen with news of the license being sold to FFG. Mr. Hamblen has issue with the sale of HIS games license without his consultation.

About the same time (or maybe just before) Stronghold gets ahold of Mr. Hamblen showing interest in the game.

Mr. Hamblen decides (after the Hasbro call) to stand for HIS right to license by selling it to Stronghold. {mabye the thought is something like "let the courts decide who owns the rights.}

Thus two companies (unknown to each others plans) purchase from the party claiming to own the rights and the confusion is born.

I hope for the sake of both companies AND us players that this gets decided honorably and quick! Of course, MY solution would be for BOTH companies to publish and let the players decide who has the better game!
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 11:00 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Blank Francis
New Zealand

Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Beholm wrote:
I could ALMOST see it unfolding something like this:

Hasbro contacts Mr. Hamblen with news of the license being sold to FFG. Mr. Hamblen has issue with the sale of HIS games license without his consultation.

About the same time (or maybe just before) Stronghold gets ahold of Mr. Hamblen showing interest in the game.

Mr. Hamblen decides (after the Hasbro call) to stand for HIS right to license by selling it to Stronghold. {mabye the thought is something like "let the courts decide who owns the rights.}

Thus two companies (unknown to each others plans) purchase from the party claiming to own the rights and the confusion is born.

I hope for the sake of both companies AND us players that this gets decided honorably and quick! Of course, MY solution would be for BOTH companies to publish and let the players decide who has the better game!


Well, that's kind of unnecessarily slanderous, given that you have no idea how things unfolded.
26 
 Thumb up
0.03
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 11:10 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Colorcrayons
United States
Crystal
Minnesota
flag msg tools
Avatar
blankfrancis wrote:
Beholm wrote:
I could ALMOST see it unfolding something like this:


Well, that's kind of unnecessarily slanderous, given that you have no idea how things unfolded.


1) That would be called 'libel' not slander.
2) He isn't asserting the scenario as a fact, hence it is not a defamatory statement.

Much like everybody's comments on this issue so far, that comment is pure speculation.
18 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 11:33 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Lance
United States
Moorhead
Minnesota
The coolest best thing I have ever done in my life is being a father
badge
Caleb, the best 6 month old little brother ever
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Beholm wrote:
I could ALMOST see it unfolding something like this:

Hasbro contacts Mr. Hamblen with news of the license being sold to FFG. Mr. Hamblen has issue with the sale of HIS games license without his consultation.

About the same time (or maybe just before) Stronghold gets ahold of Mr. Hamblen showing interest in the game.

Mr. Hamblen decides (after the Hasbro call) to stand for HIS right to license by selling it to Stronghold. {mabye the thought is something like "let the courts decide who owns the rights.}


I have no personal contact with FFG, but I do with Stronghold on a fairly regular basis. If I am to believe what they tell me, and I do, then this chain of events is not accurate in the slightest.

I have tons of respect for both game companies, and I really hope they can work this out to an end they will both find amicable. I don't think it is likely, but I can hope.
18 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 12:12 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Nate Downs
United States
Granville
Ohio
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
If you ask me, I bet FFG is hoping that they are the losers - mostly because Hasbro would owe a fair chunk of change to them, I would imagine. On the other hand, some breach of contract by the designer with Stronghold would suck, not nearly as close to win-win.

The only fault I would see with FFG is that they were probably sitting on the announcement for a long time and could have prevented this by simply announcing it earlier. It isn't like that cover art was thrown together overnight...
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 12:27 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Daniel Danzer
Germany
Stuttgart
southwest
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Collaborate and share.

Get together at one table and publish it under "Stronghold at FFG", share the work for it (rules reworking, graphics, miniatures, manufacturing, distributing), each company with its best.
22 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 12:56 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Richard Milner
United Kingdom
London
Avatar
The timing would seem to indicate that FFG only became aware of the Stronghold version at the last minute, and made their announcement in order to stick their flag in the territory likely to come under dispute.

No blame necessarily attaches to either publisher.

The most likely explanation is that some minor functionary in the bowels of Hasbro has failed to bring the information about the potential clash to the attention of the right people.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 1:03 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Nate Downs
United States
Granville
Ohio
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Kilkrazy wrote:
The timing would seem to indicate that FFG only became aware of the Stronghold version at the last minute, and made their announcement in order to stick their flag in the territory likely to come under dispute.

No blame necessarily attaches to either publisher.

The most likely explanation is that some minor functionary in the bowels of Hasbro has failed to bring the information about the potential clash to the attention of the right people.


All I am saying is that if FFG didn't sit on it for a year and a half, then Stronghold wouldn't have even continued pursuing their perceived right. Stronghold's announcement seems like they *just* signed on with the author...

I see it as a fault, not a reason to blame. I also wouldn't blame some underling at Hasbro - you must be a manager if you jump to that type of assumption! Shit rolls downhill, right?
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 1:41 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Gnomish Mustard
United States

Texas
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Beholm wrote:
I could ALMOST see it unfolding something like this:

Hasbro contacts Mr. Hamblen with news of the license being sold to FFG. Mr. Hamblen has issue with the sale of HIS games license without his consultation.

About the same time (or maybe just before) Stronghold gets ahold of Mr. Hamblen showing interest in the game.

Mr. Hamblen decides (after the Hasbro call) to stand for HIS right to license by selling it to Stronghold. {mabye the thought is something like "let the courts decide who owns the rights.}

Thus two companies (unknown to each others plans) purchase from the party claiming to own the rights and the confusion is born.

I hope for the sake of both companies AND us players that this gets decided honorably and quick! Of course, MY solution would be for BOTH companies to publish and let the players decide who has the better game!


That is interesting to see play out and makes a great deal of sense. I dont know much about the situation but it does seem like someone was trying to work both sides of the fence here.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 2:16 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Tim Koppang
United States
Westmont
Illinois
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
casperthegoth wrote:
All I am saying is that if FFG didn't sit on it for a year and a half, then Stronghold wouldn't have even continued pursuing their perceived right. Stronghold's announcement seems like they *just* signed on with the author...

Yes, but that would be poor marketing strategy. Announcing a game a year and a half ahead of your intended publication date typically leads to disappointment as problems crop up and fans become annoyed by unexpected delays. Better to wait until you have something in hand.
16 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 2:20 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Colorcrayons
United States
Crystal
Minnesota
flag msg tools
Avatar
tckoppang wrote:
casperthegoth wrote:
All I am saying is that if FFG didn't sit on it for a year and a half, then Stronghold wouldn't have even continued pursuing their perceived right. Stronghold's announcement seems like they *just* signed on with the author...

Yes, but that would be poor marketing strategy. Announcing a game a year and a half ahead of your intended publication date typically leads to disappointment as problems crop up and fans become annoyed by unexpected delays. Better to wait until you have something in hand.


Case in point: Gears of War.

How many years did it take for FFG to release that game after they announced it? 3 Years? 4 Years? Sitting at the bottom of their 'Upcoming' page while consumers see it as a practical joke to make fun of FFG with since it sat so long in development limbo.

I wouldn't want to go through that backlash again if I were FFG.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 2:29 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
W. Eric Martin
United States
Apex
North Carolina
flag msg tools
admin
Avatar
Gnomish Mustard wrote:
Beholm wrote:
I could ALMOST see it unfolding something like this:

Hasbro contacts Mr. Hamblen with news of the license being sold to FFG. Mr. Hamblen has issue with the sale of HIS games license without his consultation.

About the same time (or maybe just before) Stronghold gets ahold of Mr. Hamblen showing interest in the game.

Mr. Hamblen decides (after the Hasbro call) to stand for HIS right to license by selling it to Stronghold. {mabye the thought is something like "let the courts decide who owns the rights.}

Thus two companies (unknown to each others plans) purchase from the party claiming to own the rights and the confusion is born.

That is interesting to see play out and makes a great deal of sense. I dont know much about the situation but it does seem like someone was trying to work both sides of the fence here.

No, that "situation" should be squelched as pure speculation that defames Richard Hamblen. From my background as a writer, I know that publishers resell or relicense or reprint work all the time without notifying the original author. My wife sometimes receives a check for a reprint of her work several months after the work already appeared in print without her knowledge.

Unless the contract between Hamblen and Avalon Hill spelled out in detail how ownership of the material is to be determined after the game ceases to be published (assuming that was defined in the contract), then a situation could easily arise with each party thinking that it holds rights to the design. Assume no duplicity from either party.
74 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 2:42 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Chris Schenck
United States
Dayton
Ohio
flag msg tools
GO BUCKS!
badge
Stop touching me!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
W Eric Martin wrote:
No, that "situation" should be squelched as pure speculation that defames Richard Hamblen.

I totally agree, but I'm curious how two publishers decided to reprint a quarter-century old game at the same time. That's quite a coincidence!

I'm guessing there was some kind of external stimulus that triggered both of these companies to pursue the reprint at the same time. I agree it's unfair to assume Mr. Hamblen was the source of the stimulus though.
9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Edited Tue Nov 1, 2011 2:59 pm
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 2:59 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Superhawk
United States
Milwaukee
Wisconsin
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
casperthegoth wrote:
Kilkrazy wrote:
The timing would seem to indicate that FFG only became aware of the Stronghold version at the last minute, and made their announcement in order to stick their flag in the territory likely to come under dispute.

No blame necessarily attaches to either publisher.

The most likely explanation is that some minor functionary in the bowels of Hasbro has failed to bring the information about the potential clash to the attention of the right people.


All I am saying is that if FFG didn't sit on it for a year and a half, then Stronghold wouldn't have even continued pursuing their perceived right. Stronghold's announcement seems like they *just* signed on with the author...

I see it as a fault, not a reason to blame. I also wouldn't blame some underling at Hasbro - you must be a manager if you jump to that type of assumption! Shit rolls downhill, right?


Didn't strongholds announcment say they've been working with the designer for 18 months?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 3:04 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Superhawk
United States
Milwaukee
Wisconsin
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Beholm wrote:
I could ALMOST see it unfolding something like this:

Hasbro contacts Mr. Hamblen with news of the license being sold to FFG. Mr. Hamblen has issue with the sale of HIS games license without his consultation.

About the same time (or maybe just before) Stronghold gets ahold of Mr. Hamblen showing interest in the game.

Mr. Hamblen decides (after the Hasbro call) to stand for HIS right to license by selling it to Stronghold. {mabye the thought is something like "let the courts decide who owns the rights.}

Thus two companies (unknown to each others plans) purchase from the party claiming to own the rights and the confusion is born.

I hope for the sake of both companies AND us players that this gets decided honorably and quick! Of course, MY solution would be for BOTH companies to publish and let the players decide who has the better game!


This is how rumors start. Rumors are never good for anyone. I am not sure why people want to speculate on what might have happened in a place and time they were not present about something they are not involved in. I find that akin to gambling with the worst kind of odds, for a jackpot equal to nothing.
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 3:07 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
jefF, There are some who call me... DuneKitteh
United States
Wood Dale
Illinois
Useless rollover, booya! Dune Kitty says, "deal with it."
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Beholm wrote:
I could ALMOST see it unfolding something like this:


I guess we really are going to have this discussion...

again...

despite the fact that it has already occurred in no less than a half dozen SEPARATE threads in the MoV forums...

and every single thing or crazy speculative conspiracy theory or pointing fingers blame game point or company/designer bashing assertion has already been brought up, multiple times...

*sigh*
11 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 3:16 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Kevin Rutherford
United States
Perrysburg
Ohio
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
What I find rather strange is that FFG never contacted Hamblen in regards to rule changes and things. FFG has contacted authors in the past to get their opinions on changes they'd like to make in their republished games. Seems it didn't happen here.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 3:23 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Raviv Nagel
Israel
Haifa
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
cbs42 wrote:

I'm guessing there was some kind of external stimulus that triggered both of these companies to pursue the reprint at the same time. I agree it's unfair to assume Mr. Hamblen was the source of the stimulus though.

I think Eric Summerer might have something to do with that.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 3:32 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Curt Carpenter
United States

Washington
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
midnightmadness wrote:
I guess we really are going to have this discussion...

again...

despite the fact that it has already occurred in no less than a half dozen SEPARATE threads in the MoV forums...

Is it really surprising that there are people who read BoardgameGeek News but don't read MoV forums?
22 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 4:04 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Rob Burns
Macedonia
Skopje
mbmbmbmbmb
Wait a second... where's the third expansion for Cosmic Encounter?

Some of us can't wait to see our old friends Aristocrat and Skeptic, not to mention Lucre, Moons, or something new...?

Waaahhh! cry
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 4:05 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Danger Mike
United States
Fenton
Missouri
mbmbmbmbmb
It just doesn't make sense that neither FFG or Hasbro contacted Richard Hamblen.

UNLESS...

FFG didn't contact him because of his reputation for being difficult and reclusive and considered dealing with Hasbro easier.

AND/OR....

Hasbro didn't want to open up the issue of ownership and thought they could just brazen it out.

AND/OR...

Either one or both KNEW Hamblen was dealing with Stronghold and figured they could beat them to the punch (would explain why FFG's development is so far along).

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 4:09 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Hilko Drude
Germany
Goettingen
Lower Saxony
designer
publisher
Avatar
mbmbmb
kevruth wrote:
What I find rather strange is that FFG never contacted Hamblen in regards to rule changes and things. FFG has contacted authors in the past to get their opinions on changes they'd like to make in their republished games. Seems it didn't happen here.


I find it disturbing even - working on a game for a year without contacting the designer? That might be usual among some publishers, but I fail to find it normal. So while the letters suggest the companies mean well, the situation could have been avoided very easily (I don't even blame Hasbro too much here).
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 4:23 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Colorcrayons
United States
Crystal
Minnesota
flag msg tools
Avatar
The Lone Gamer wrote:
It just doesn't make sense that neither FFG or Hasbro contacted Richard Hamblen.

UNLESS...

FFG didn't contact him because of his reputation for being difficult and reclusive and considered dealing with Hasbro easier.

AND/OR....

Hasbro didn't want to open up the issue of ownership and thought they could just brazen it out.

AND/OR...

Either one or both KNEW Hamblen was dealing with Stronghold and figured they could beat them to the punch (would explain why FFG's development is so far along).


OR...

FFG thought that Hasbro still owned the rights so they deal with who they thought owned the rights instead of taking what could be a backwards route to acquiring the license by contacting the designer first.

Contacting the designer is not imperative to reprint a game, unless that designer is needed to tweak the game or to acquire the rights if the previous game producer no longer has them.

If Hasbro showed proof of ownership of the license (which is likely, or FFG wouldn't have signed contracts/handed over a wad of dough), then the question becomes:

"Why the hell would FFG contact Hamblen?"

It's rampant just speculation either way.

But if I were trying to acquire the license to a game, I would contact the actual company that produced the game first before going through the trouble of contacting the designer.

Not that the designer might not have the license, but it stands to reason that the company would before the designer would, as it would appear to be mostly typical.

Stronghold seems to be in the same situation, but it appears they went to the designer first and didnt bother to see if Hasbro might have claim.

Hamblen/Stronghold may very well be within the right, but it seems even more odd for Stronghold to not check all the loose ends before signing their own deal as well.

Which brings us to who really holds the license. Who knows? It seems not even Hasbro or Hamblen know for sure since they both feel they do.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 4:26 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
United States
Maineville
Ohio
mbmb
I can't wait to see the photos of the little kids in remote villages running around with their Texas Rangers World Champions t-shirts and their copies of MoV from the losing publisher.
53 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 4:56 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Steve Stanton
United States
Paoli
Pennsylvania
mbmbmbmbmb
LOL!!!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 5:48 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Jefferson Krogh
United States
San Leandro
California
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
rjburns3 wrote:
Wait a second... where's the third expansion for Cosmic Encounter?

Some of us can't wait to see our old friends Aristocrat and Skeptic, not to mention Lucre, Moons, or something new...?

Waaahhh! cry


Probably February 2012. Cosmic Incursion and Cosmic Conflict both hit in February in their respective years.

Also, these FFG lists never include things they haven't actually announced yet. Which means FFG should announce the Cosmic Expansion 3, like, today. Yeah!
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 5:58 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
jefF, There are some who call me... DuneKitteh
United States
Wood Dale
Illinois
Useless rollover, booya! Dune Kitty says, "deal with it."
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
curtc wrote:
midnightmadness wrote:
I guess we really are going to have this discussion...

again...

despite the fact that it has already occurred in no less than a half dozen SEPARATE threads in the MoV forums...

Is it really surprising that there are people who read BoardgameGeek News but don't read MoV forums?


If only there was a link to the BGG MoV game page, and its forums somewhere... anywhere in this post/announcement... if only it wasn't SO hard to do a minute of looking before leaping and bashing companies and designers... again.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Edited Tue Nov 1, 2011 6:31 pm
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 6:30 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Curt Carpenter
United States

Washington
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
And I'm sure those who want to see more in-depth discussion will go there.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 6:46 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
jefF, There are some who call me... DuneKitteh
United States
Wood Dale
Illinois
Useless rollover, booya! Dune Kitty says, "deal with it."
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
curtc wrote:
And I'm sure those who want to see more in-depth discussion will go there.


You're right (not being sarcastic, at all). I'm making a point and I'm really just quixotically tilting against people tossing out redundant commentary before they look / read, and I'm trying to fight the nature of basic human laziness and the attention span of gnats the internet has delivered to us. I don't expect that people read the 17 pages of comments on Yahoo or Fox News or Huffpost either before submitting their $.02 to news there, I don't know why I'd expect it here.

Carry on...
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 6:57 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Lance McMillan
United States
Lakebay
Washington
mbmbmbmbmb
The Lone Gamer wrote:
It just doesn't make sense that neither FFG or Hasbro contacted Richard Hamblen.
UNLESS...
FFG didn't contact him because of his reputation for being difficult and reclusive and considered dealing with Hasbro easier.
AND/OR....
Hasbro didn't want to open up the issue of ownership and thought they could just brazen it out.
AND/OR...
Either one or both KNEW Hamblen was dealing with Stronghold and figured they could beat them to the punch (would explain why FFG's development is so far along).


The fact that Hamblen hasn't commented on it here on BGG speaks volumes and would tend (to my thinking) to point towards the first statement as being the primary reason (i.e. Hamblen being reclusive or difficult to deal with).
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 7:50 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Jed Litwiller
United States
McPherson
Kansas
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I say let FFG and Stronghold both publish their own versions of the game, then we'll see who's is better!
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 8:26 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Sean P
United States

Tucson
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The easy question is why FFG didn't contact Hamblen (the designer).

Another easy question is why didn't Stronghold contact Hasbro (the last company to publish the game).

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 8:36 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Daniel Kearns
United States
Bloomington
Indiana
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Dishbird wrote:
I say let FFG and Stronghold both publish their own versions of the game, then we'll see who's is better!


We have precedent on this situation:

Call one: "Merchant of Venus"
Call the other: "Venus"
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 8:50 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
David Anderson
United States
seattle
Washington
flag msg tools
Two Time Cancer Survivor - Never Give Up. Never Surrender. -Jason Nesmith from Galaxy Quest (1999 movie)
badge
After losing my Father, Grandfather and childhood best friend to suicide, My message is simple: You are not alone.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Kaleljorson7 wrote:
The easy question is why FFG didn't contact Hamblen (the designer).

Another easy question is why didn't Stronghold contact Hasbro (the last company to publish the game).



The easy answer is that neither felt obligated to.

3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 8:52 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
David Dawson
United States
Champaign
Illinois
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Nice to see this covered, and to know when Nexus Ops is coming out, but I was really hoping for something about Rex and Wiz-War. Supposed to be November, but... no information.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 8:56 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Tom B
United States
Naperville
ILLINOIS
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Lancer4321 wrote:
The Lone Gamer wrote:
It just doesn't make sense that neither FFG or Hasbro contacted Richard Hamblen.
UNLESS...
FFG didn't contact him because of his reputation for being difficult and reclusive and considered dealing with Hasbro easier.
AND/OR....
Hasbro didn't want to open up the issue of ownership and thought they could just brazen it out.
AND/OR...
Either one or both KNEW Hamblen was dealing with Stronghold and figured they could beat them to the punch (would explain why FFG's development is so far along).


The fact that Hamblen hasn't commented on it here on BGG speaks volumes and would tend (to my thinking) to point towards the first statement as being the primary reason (i.e. Hamblen being reclusive or difficult to deal with).

Or hasn't discovered the series of tubes that makes up the interwebs.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 8:56 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Raviv Nagel
Israel
Haifa
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
dawson_osu wrote:
Nice to see this covered, and to know when Nexus Ops is coming out, but I was really hoping for something about Rex and Wiz-War. Supposed to be November, but... no information.

I guess FFG had a delay at their printing facility. It seems that many games will miss their target date by a month or so (the Runewars expansion was announced for October and is not out yet).
So I assume Rex ans Wiz-War are now December releases, and I guess that's why we haven't seen many previews of them. FFG are trying not to build the hype too early.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 9:05 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Walt
United States
Orange County
California
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
IANAL, but:
Richard Hamblen's designer entry wrote:
A. Richard Hamblen (born February 2, 1945 in Albuquerque, New Mexico) is a game designer and former computer programmer known for designing classic Avalon Hill games. His first Avalon Hill credit appears to be from 1975 when he apparently joined the editorial staff.

Abridged List of Notable Games

1977 Victory in the Pacific
1979 Magic Realm
1982 Gunslinger
1988 Merchant of Venus

If he was hired by AH in 1975, then barring any special contract or failure of AH to pay Mr. Hamblen, then copyright would go to AH, the games being "works for hire", that is, done in his capacity as a paid AH employee.

However, if Stronghold wants to work on a similar game, it's far too late for patent protection of the rules, and copyright issues can be avoided. It cannot be called Merchant of Venus™, however. Since it's just a pun on The Merchant of Venice and Venus isn't actually in the game, this doesn't seem like a big deal. Call it Ventures on Vega.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 9:35 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Jayson Stevens
Canada
Surrey
British Columbia
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
To chime in with some salient points from the MoV forums.

1: Richard Hamblen is in fact reclusive and has a history of not wanting to be contacted/dealt with.
http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/293818/can-richard-hamblen-b...
This thread is an example of such. He is apparently so protective of his privacy that all attempts at communication have to be routed through a third party.
This explains FFG not contacting him. Dude said he didn't want to be bothered, so they don't bother him.

2: While not stated outright, it appears the FFG edition is already at the printers. There's no way it could be a Q1 release unless it was in production already. Shipping from China alone takes 3 months. It's already been indicated that they obtained the license 18 months ago.

2a: Conversely, Stronghold has stated they just closed the deal on the license, and spent 18 months obtaining it. This means that Stronghold started negotiations around the same time FFG closed their deal.

2a*: This lends credence to the Hamblen is reclusive and hard to deal with. 18 months is a long time to secure a simple license to reprint.

3: FFG was planning on announcing their MoV next month, and only accelerated their press release due to Stronghold. This is the correct move on their part, in all aspects.
Announcing games too early pisses off players who gripe about delays and waiting (see Gears of War, Super Dungeon Explore, etc). However, once it was out there that a conflict existed, they needed to put their position forward.

4: Speculation is worthless, please stop. Either someone is going to pull out the original contract, or it's going to court. No point in daydreaming before that.
31 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 9:45 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Ralph T
United States
Signal Hill
California
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Man, Gunslinger would be awesome if FFG did it and had a bunch of unique figures...
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 10:12 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Eric Vogel
United States
Hayward
California
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Having just read Shannon Appelcline's excellent new book, Designers and Dragons, it's clear that a lot of the great game companies of history went under either because they sued or got sued. I think it would be marvelous to see both companies decide that discretion was the better part of valor in this case.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 10:36 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Walt
United States
Orange County
California
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
palmerkun wrote:
Either someone is going to pull out the original contract, or it's going to court.

If RH was an employee, no specific contract for MoV would exist; and, there's no particular point in keeping employment records over 20 years old. (One opinion is that any paperwork should be destroyed as soon as no legal obligation exists to keep it: paperwork is lawyer chum. Though, of course, things that convey property rights....)

Going to court is not inevitable. Stronghold games would have to be spectacularly rash to consider contending against Hasbro even if RH has a contract showing MoV is his; the legal costs aren't worth the use of the MoV name. The trademark was abandoned by AH, and as AH's successor, Hasbro has at least as much right as anyone else to TM it, which they have apparently done. If Hasbro is like most big corporations, their lawyers are dying to show how useful and necessary they are. Stronghold can easily avoid the IP issues, and would be wise to do so.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 10:55 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Pete Hooper
United States
Machesney Park
Illinois
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Tall_Walt wrote:
IANAL, but:
Richard Hamblen's designer entry wrote:
A. Richard Hamblen (born February 2, 1945 in Albuquerque, New Mexico) is a game designer and former computer programmer known for designing classic Avalon Hill games. His first Avalon Hill credit appears to be from 1975 when he apparently joined the editorial staff.

Abridged List of Notable Games

1977 Victory in the Pacific
1979 Magic Realm
1982 Gunslinger
1988 Merchant of Venus

If he was hired by AH in 1975, then barring any special contract or failure of AH to pay Mr. Hamblen, then copyright would go to AH, the games being "works for hire", that is, done in his capacity as a paid AH employee.


I thought I read that he wasn't an AH staff member, but a freelancer when most of these titles were published. That would potentially change whether they were works for hire.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 11:28 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Frank La Terra
Australia

Avatar
The Lone Gamer wrote:
It just doesn't make sense that neither FFG or Hasbro contacted Richard Hamblen.

UNLESS...

FFG didn't contact him because of his reputation for being difficult and reclusive and considered dealing with Hasbro easier.

AND/OR....

Hasbro didn't want to open up the issue of ownership and thought they could just brazen it out.

AND/OR...

Either one or both KNEW Hamblen was dealing with Stronghold and figured they could beat them to the punch (would explain why FFG's development is so far along).



Or FFG did attempt to contact Hamblen, who did not return their correspondance.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Nov 1, 2011 11:37 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Board games addict
United States

flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
I hope this dude gets paid and all the royalties he should have coming to him for these two companies wanting to re-boot his game.

So far, it is sounding like Fantasy Flight is the one in the wrong, but lets hear more details to get the full story if any more are forthcoming.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Wed Nov 2, 2011 1:44 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Pete Hooper
United States
Machesney Park
Illinois
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
quinnox wrote:
So far, it is sounding like Fantasy Flight is the one in the wrong,


Could you explain how you have drawn that conclusion? I have seen NO evidence that even begins to explain how either party is in the wrong.
11 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Wed Nov 2, 2011 1:48 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Board games addict
United States

flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
nightglider1 wrote:
quinnox wrote:
So far, it is sounding like Fantasy Flight is the one in the wrong,


Could you explain how you have drawn that conclusion? I have seen NO evidence that even begins to explain how either party is in the wrong.


I'm taking both statements at face value. If the original game designer says he thinks Hasbro is full of it when they sold his game rights to Fantasy Flight, I take his side over a corporation like Hasbro. I'm sure there will be some kind of settlement in this, because it could be really bad public relations for a company like Fantasy Flight if they get in an ugly court battle where it seems they are fighting the game designer in an attempt to make money off his original creation.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Edited Wed Nov 2, 2011 2:25 am
  • Posted Wed Nov 2, 2011 2:24 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Rob Rob
United States
La Mesa
California
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
Stronghold Games has supposedly negotiated with Michael Christopher (BGG user Dathkadan) to use his graphic design in its version of Merchant of Venus, but nothing official has been announced.

Yay! meeple
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Wed Nov 2, 2011 4:07 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Guido Van Horn
United States
Othello
Washington
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
palmerkun wrote:

2: While not stated outright, it appears the FFG edition is already at the printers. There's no way it could be a Q1 release unless it was in production already. Shipping from China alone takes 3 months. It's already been indicated that they obtained the license 18 months ago.


not even remotely true... port to port transit is about 3 weeks depends on what port to what port, most stuff can get from factory to port within a week, and can be discharged depending on customs issues etc. and delivered in about a week, maybe two, if there are issues.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Edited Wed Nov 2, 2011 4:54 am
  • Posted Wed Nov 2, 2011 4:53 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
SuperflyCircus Pete
United States
Independence
Kentucky
flag msg tools
designer
www.superflycircus.blogspot.com - Best Reviews Ever!
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Let the popcorn be plenty and the conjecture as nasty as it wants to be.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Wed Nov 2, 2011 5:02 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
M C
United States
Orem
Utah
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
W Eric Martin wrote:
Gnomish Mustard wrote:
Beholm wrote:
I could ALMOST see it unfolding something like this:

Hasbro contacts Mr. Hamblen with news of the license being sold to FFG. Mr. Hamblen has issue with the sale of HIS games license without his consultation.

About the same time (or maybe just before) Stronghold gets ahold of Mr. Hamblen showing interest in the game.

Mr. Hamblen decides (after the Hasbro call) to stand for HIS right to license by selling it to Stronghold. {mabye the thought is something like "let the courts decide who owns the rights.}

Thus two companies (unknown to each others plans) purchase from the party claiming to own the rights and the confusion is born.

That is interesting to see play out and makes a great deal of sense. I dont know much about the situation but it does seem like someone was trying to work both sides of the fence here.

No, that "situation" should be squelched as pure speculation that defames Richard Hamblen. From my background as a writer, I know that publishers resell or relicense or reprint work all the time without notifying the original author. My wife sometimes receives a check for a reprint of her work several months after the work already appeared in print without her knowledge.

Unless the contract between Hamblen and Avalon Hill spelled out in detail how ownership of the material is to be determined after the game ceases to be published (assuming that was defined in the contract), then a situation could easily arise with each party thinking that it holds rights to the design. Assume no duplicity from either party.


I remember in a sort of similar dispute neither party could dredge up the original contracts as they were on abandoned computers.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Wed Nov 2, 2011 5:13 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Daniel Schulz
United States
Saint Michael
Minnesota
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I think its a leap to assume that FFG didn't contact Hamblem. Unless I missed something, I see no evidence they didn't.

When this game was originally published Hamblem wasn't on AH's staff, therefore there had to be some sort of contract. That contract is what this whole debate will be resolved on. When Hasbro bought AH, they acquired their records, and a copy of that contract. I have a hard time believing that this contract was somehow lost when it was intellectual property, and held value. Stranger things have happened, but without any other evidence the assumption has to be that it exists.

Also, both companies will not produce this game. Having the name 'Merchants of Venus' on the box is everything. If someone puts a game out without that name, it will sit in their warehouse for years. Not only will they not have the name to help sell the game, they will have direct competition with a version of the game with the name. They are businessmen, and (I assume) are not stupid. They have families to feed, and kids to put through college.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Wed Nov 2, 2011 5:22 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
John "Omega" Williams
United States

Michigan
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
When I picked up a license for a game that had been published in two previous versions back in the 90s - The first thing I did was contact the original game designer and see is he wanted to participate. When the license was swiped out from under me by another game company... They contacted neither of us.

When doing a revamp of an existing game or setting, you don't allways need the previous designers permission. Especially if the new version may bear little resemblance to the predecessors.

I do not think this was the case though with Merchant of Venus. Least I'd like to think that FFG isn't putting out a game that shares with the original the name and little else.

For now though there is no way of telling what sequence of events lead to this situation.

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Wed Nov 2, 2011 5:40 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
dave elliot
United States

Wisconsin
mbmbmbmbmb
Wait til you see the Duke Nuke'em game they got coming out.
2 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Wed Nov 2, 2011 5:42 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Sean P
United States

Tucson
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
quinnox wrote:
I hope this dude gets paid and all the royalties he should have coming to him for these two companies wanting to re-boot his game.

So far, it is sounding like Fantasy Flight is the one in the wrong, but lets hear more details to get the full story if any more are forthcoming.



Couldn't disagree more. Sounds like FFG did everything right.

Including stipulating in their contract with Hasbro/Wizards/Avalon Hill that Hamblen would get some money.

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Wed Nov 2, 2011 6:08 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Walt
United States
Orange County
California
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
quinnox wrote:
nightglider1 wrote:
quinnox wrote:
So far, it is sounding like Fantasy Flight is the one in the wrong,

Could you explain how you have drawn that conclusion? I have seen NO evidence that even begins to explain how either party is in the wrong.

I'm taking both statements at face value. If the original game designer says he thinks Hasbro is full of it when they sold his game rights to Fantasy Flight, I take his side over a corporation like Hasbro. I'm sure there will be some kind of settlement in this, because it could be really bad public relations for a company like Fantasy Flight if they get in an ugly court battle where it seems they are fighting the game designer in an attempt to make money off his original creation.

Probably most of us disagree with the current state of IP rights when it comes to games, but there's no such thing as rights to a game, as a game. A patent can protect game play, but a patent would have expired by now. Trademark covers the words "Merchant of Venus" used as the name of a game; whether AH or RH filed trademark back when, it lapsed and Hasbro picked it up: theirs. Copyright can last forever, but it only covers the original art and wording of the rule book, not the rules themselves--that's patent; any of us can create new art and rule wording and create a third version of MoV as long as we use a different name. Trade dress (look and feel) might cover a new version of the game, but it acts like trademark: the first one to use it in interstate commerce gets to call dibs: this looks like it will be Hasbro/FFG.

Some "moral rights" are held by the original artist, but in this case it appears to be limited to RH being credited (or not) as he chooses for each version. So, FFG could end up with "Merchant of Venus" with no designer credit, and Stronghold could end up with "Ventures to Vega by RH", as one of many possible outcomes.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Wed Nov 2, 2011 6:13 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Mikhail Kruzhkov
Russian Federation
Moscow
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Tall_Walt wrote:
Probably most of us disagree with the current state of IP rights when it comes to games, but there's no such thing as rights to a game, as a game. A patent can protect game play, but a patent would have expired by now. Trademark covers the words "Merchant of Venus" used as the name of a game; whether AH or RH filed trademark back when, it lapsed and Hasbro picked it up: theirs. Copyright can last forever, but it only covers the original art and wording of the rule book, not the rules themselves--that's patent; any of us can create new art and rule wording and create a third version of MoV as long as we use a different name. Trade dress (look and feel) might cover a new version of the game, but it acts like trademark: the first one to use it in interstate commerce gets to call dibs: this looks like it will be Hasbro/FFG.

Some "moral rights" are held by the original artist, but in this case it appears to be limited to RH being credited (or not) as he chooses for each version. So, FFG could end up with "Merchant of Venus" with no designer credit, and Stronghold could end up with "Ventures to Vega by RH", as one of many possible outcomes.


So what you are saying is FFG (or any company) can reprint any game if it is not protected by a valid patent (changing the rules wording and the art)? They will just have to register the trademark if it's expired? But what about the public opinion? Does it not matter?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Wed Nov 2, 2011 7:33 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Holger Hannemann
United Kingdom
Severn Beach
South Gloucestershire
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I sure hope this won't be a Uchronia repeating.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Wed Nov 2, 2011 10:03 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Edward
United States
Aurora
NE
Avatar
mbmb
Is it possible, in an amicable state of affairs, for both FFG and Stronghold to both publish their game? I know this is counter to best business practice but the result could benefit everyone involved.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Wed Nov 2, 2011 11:59 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
The Gray Dog Passes Go
United States
Reno
Nevada
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
LordHellfury wrote:
I won't comment on MoV since I am sure this thread will be dominated by speculative posts on that subject, even though hundreds of posts have speculated about that topic to death already.

You sure called that one correctly ...

This is a case where it would be nice to turn off the commenting feature. Absolutely nothing of value is being added here, and it's impossible to get a word in edgewise on any of the other announcements.

Once again, baseless speculation and uninformed rambling carries the day at BGG ... shake
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Wed Nov 2, 2011 5:07 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Walt
United States
Orange County
California
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
magnitt wrote:
So what you are saying is FFG (or any company) can reprint any game if it is not protected by a valid patent (changing the rules wording and the art)? They will just have to register the trademark if it's expired?

Yes, in the US with a US designer. We don't have strong "moral rights" for artists, and I'm not sure a game would be considered art by a court.

For an opposite example, a company in Brazil (if I recall correctly) put out a version of Reiner Knizia's Modern Art without a license. RK (or the current authorized publisher) sued. It was settled in RK's favor, but I'm unsure on what basis: it could have been trademark (if Modern Art was just translated into Portuguese), copyright (if the rules were just translated), trade dress (if the whole game looked too much like the authorized version, or it could have just been a practical settlement since it would have cost the Brazilian company tens of thousands of dollars to defend a suit in Europe, just from travel costs.

This last part is what's likely to kill the Stronghold version. If Hasbro wants to kill the Stronghold version, it's dead: Hasbro can spend enough to bankrupt Stronghold without noticing it, without having to explain it to their stockholders.

magnitt wrote:
But what about the public opinion? Does it not matter?

Sure it matters, but if two similar games come out, many people will pick the one that plays best. If public opinion were decisive, I'm sure we can think of a company or two who would not exist. If Hasbro or FFG decide to play tough, some people in our hobby may get upset with them for a while, but it won't last (and won't even matter to Hasbro).
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Wed Nov 2, 2011 7:47 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Timo Schneider
Germany
Kamen / Unna
Nordrhein-Westfalen
mbmbmbmb
To the nice people over at Stronghold Games and Fantasy Flight Games as well:

I'll buy both games/versions of Merchant of Venus at Essen next year.

The usual printrun of Stronghold Games is what? 1.500 copies? Then there's just need of 1.499 gamers like me. Adn I bet there are enough out there.

Most of the time we are 3-4 people at our gaming days, sometimes 5-6. So there'd be times we would choose the version optimized for 2-4 players (FFG) while on occasion with more than 4 players we'd play the other one (Stronghold Games).

No need to fight over it. :-)
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Wed Nov 2, 2011 8:35 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Derek Thompson
United States
Beech Grove
Indiana
mbmbmbmbmb
Timo1977 wrote:
To the nice people over at Stronghold Games and Fantasy Flight Games as well:

I'll buy both games/versions of Merchant of Venus at Essen next year.

The usual printrun of Stronghold Games is what? 1.500 copies? Then there's just need of 1.499 gamers like me. Adn I bet there are enough out there.

Most of the time we are 3-4 people at our gaming days, sometimes 5-6. So there'd be times we would choose the version optimized for 2-4 players (FFG) while on occasion with more than 4 players we'd play the other one (Stronghold Games).

No need to fight over it. :-)


I don't really know the hobby population numbers, but I don't believe there are 1500 people that would deliberately buy both versions of Merchant of Venus, say, in the first 6 months of them both being released. Just seems wasteful. But maybe I'm wrong. Sounds like a "good" idea for some sort of Kickstarter campaign?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Thu Nov 3, 2011 4:33 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Ralph T
United States
Signal Hill
California
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
One thing is for sure, Stronghold will not be releasing Merchant of Venus... they will have to title it something else.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Thu Nov 3, 2011 6:49 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Hilko Drude
Germany
Goettingen
Lower Saxony
designer
publisher
Avatar
mbmbmb
LordHellfury wrote:


If Hasbro showed proof of ownership of the license (which is likely, or FFG wouldn't have signed contracts/handed over a wad of dough), then the question becomes:

"Why the hell would FFG contact Hamblen?"



Um, common courtesy? The fact that someone asks such a question makes me wonder whether I have just been spoiled by the German publishing scene (despite experiencing a number of annoying issues even with the few games I've had published so far).

(Yes, I have read the rest of his thread and understood it might not have been FFG's fault if they weren't able to contact Richard Hamblen. They might want to state that in their explanation to make it sound better, though.)
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Thu Nov 3, 2011 8:26 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Richard Hutnik
United States
Poughkeepsie
New York
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
This is feeling to me a bit like what happened with the Tetris license regarding Atari and Nintendo.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Thu Nov 3, 2011 9:11 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Board games addict
United States

flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb

Regardless of what happens, I'll definitely be buying the Stronghold edition with the original designers vision of the game. Never played the original, but I'd rather get this than some tweaked expansions-ready Fantasy Flight version.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Thu Nov 3, 2011 9:23 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Tom McCarthy
United States
Parkville
Maryland
mbmbmbmbmb
So when is Reins of Power coming out?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Fri Nov 4, 2011 1:19 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Curt Carpenter
United States

Washington
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
quinnox wrote:
Regardless of what happens, I'll definitely be buying the Stronghold edition ...

Regardless of whether they release it?
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Fri Nov 4, 2011 5:20 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Jeffrey Allers
Germany
Berlin
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
HilkMAN wrote:
LordHellfury wrote:


If Hasbro showed proof of ownership of the license (which is likely, or FFG wouldn't have signed contracts/handed over a wad of dough), then the question becomes:

"Why the hell would FFG contact Hamblen?"



Um, common courtesy? The fact that someone asks such a question makes me wonder whether I have just been spoiled by the German publishing scene (despite experiencing a number of annoying issues even with the few games I've had published so far).

(Yes, I have read the rest of his thread and understood it might not have been FFG's fault if they weren't able to contact Richard Hamblen. They might want to state that in their explanation to make it sound better, though.)


My thoughts exactly. The letters above demonstrate class and professionalism on both parties' accounts. Contacting the designer--even if he does not currently hold the rights to the game--also exhibits professionalism and courtesy.

My questions, from a designer's standpoint, is why he would have a contract that DID NOT give him the rights to the game back after it went out of print. That's a standard contract clause these days: as soon as the game no longer appears in a publisher's catalogue, the designer should have the rights to the game to sell to another publisher.

Did Hamblen grant Avalon Hill rights to the game for life?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Sat Nov 5, 2011 9:20 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Leo Zappa
United States
Aliquippa
Pennsylvania
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ralpher wrote:
One thing is for sure, Stronghold will not be releasing Merchant of Venus... they will have to title it something else.


I'm not sure that's for sure, or if anything's for sure, when it comes to legal matters and lawyers. I've been involved in a few legal issues in my business, and outcomes are always surprising. If this thing goes to court, all bets are off.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Sat Nov 5, 2011 4:59 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Board games addict
United States

flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
curtc wrote:
quinnox wrote:
Regardless of what happens, I'll definitely be buying the Stronghold edition ...

Regardless of whether they release it?


I see no reason why they couldn't release a game based on the original, especially with the designer working with them even if the name has to be changed to "Moguls of Venus" or "Barons of Saturn"
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Sat Nov 5, 2011 5:24 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Martin
United States
San Diego area
California
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Having played Merchants of Venus for the first time just days before the announcements started, I just hope they can work it out and I can buy a nice new copy from someone in 2012.

I'm a big fan of the classic AH games, but I love the larger boards and counters that are coming out today, even if the artwork doesn't end up being as iconic.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Sat Nov 5, 2011 6:58 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Mike Welker
United States
Steubenville
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Comes down to the evidence as to who really has the IP... however, the real interesting part of this will be the damages potentially accruing due to the fact the both parties have acted and invested on the basis of belief in valid contracting powers of the principals involved... now that can constitute a "way out" of the mess, if a judge uses rules of reason and applies certain findings on efficient breach... though that would not be the strictly proper rule of precedent, just an attractive "cross over" for a judge to regulate in case there is sufficient gap in the contract over the IP...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Sun Nov 6, 2011 1:26 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Patrick Nickell
United States
Phoenix
Arizona
designer
publisher
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
medchem30 wrote:
I can't wait to see the photos of the little kids in remote villages running around with their Texas Rangers World Champions t-shirts and their copies of MoV from the losing publisher.


Have some GG for making me laugh so hard I almost pissed myself.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Mon Nov 7, 2011 12:56 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Peter Cox
Bosnia & Herzegovina

Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
This is all just guesswork of course.

But:

I'd be pretty amazed is Hasbro stuffed this up, and didn't own the IP before they sold it to FFG. Still, stranger things have happened. Far more likely that the designer was unaware of his legal obligations, or at least didn't bother to check into it properly before taking Stronghold's money and letting them spend money on development and legal fees.

I'd say that it's probably Stronghold that will be losing out, depending on how the designer feels about giving back whatever money he has taken so far, if it turns out that he has sold the rights. They will also find it very difficult to sue for damages against he designer as the lawyers fees will probably be more than what they'd ever get.

Bummer all round.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Mon Nov 7, 2011 5:15 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
All Hail Knucklebeard!
Australia
Wodonga
Victoria
flag msg tools
BorderCon 101 - Bring the fun, bring a smile, grab a game from the pile. Place the Meeple, play a card, swing your sword and kill the guard! So make the trip, don't be docile, look for details on my profile!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Nothing really to interest me from FFG in January. Thank god my credit card can get some respite.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Thu Nov 10, 2011 1:02 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.