Atari & Siege of Dragonspear
Archaos
Member Posts: 1,421
I read a few stuff here and there but I haven't found anything that makes it clear.
What happened with Atari and the EEs?
I read in one of Trent's interviews that with Siege they can take their time and not be pressured by a publisher.
I know that Atari published the EEs but now that's no longer the case with Siege?
Did Atari lose the rights to DnD games completely?
Did Beamdog just decide not to use a publisher on their own?
Can someone of the mods or staff clear this out or point to a source or previous post/thread?
What happened with Atari and the EEs?
I read in one of Trent's interviews that with Siege they can take their time and not be pressured by a publisher.
I know that Atari published the EEs but now that's no longer the case with Siege?
Did Atari lose the rights to DnD games completely?
Did Beamdog just decide not to use a publisher on their own?
Can someone of the mods or staff clear this out or point to a source or previous post/thread?
1
Comments
The legal text at the bottom of the page also makes no mention of Atari: I'd say Atari is out of the picture. Good riddance.
But is there an article or thread about the details of it?
WotC owns the rights to Baldurs gate..
The sentence that (should) tell us is this:
"Baldur's Gate, Dungeons & Dragons, D&D, Forgotten Realms, Baldur's Gate, Wizards of the Coast and their logos are trademarks of Wizards of the Coast LLC in the U.S.A. [...]"
So, the disclaimer says that Baldurs Gate and its logo is a trademark of wizards.
So I assume WotC used Ataris bankrupcy to buy the D&D related franchises, so that no one can use them
without their allowance.
Though I do wonder about the characters.. Are they still IP of Bioware? Or are the rights of them also
with WotC?
Hence's Minsc's appearance in NW online
http://www.gamepolitics.com/2011/08/15/atari-settles-dampd-dispute-delays-neverwinter-game#.VcJEe5NVikp
Based on the lack of Atari logo on the current www.baldursgate.com page, it appears that Atari no longer holds the distribution rights. They either reverted to WotC or perhaps Beamdog picked them up.
(and thus the direct distribution rights) are hold by WotC/Hasbro.
...And Interplay seems to hold the rights to a part of the intro..
I *assume* Beamdog has distribution rights on the Enhanced Editions and thus can act as a publisher.
Either that or WotC is the publisher (I doubt EA would bother with publishing here..).
https://www.gog.com/game/baldurs_gate_the_original_saga
https://www.gog.com/game/icewind_dale_complete
However, the IWDEE page lists Beamdog/Beamdog. So, Beamdog appears to have the distribution rights for the EEs.
https://www.gog.com/game/icewind_dale_enhanced_edition
Anyways, so it seems that Beamdog made a contract with WotC that allows them to distribute
Baldurs Gate games.
I remember Mr. Oster saying that he asks at WotC about BG3 every time they talk, which means
that the distribution rights are limited to specific products instead of the brand.
Also, I can't get this conversation out of my head:
T. Oster: I would like to make an appointment with the president about Siege of Dragonspear.
Secretary: Sure, would be the X.Y.ZZZZ alright for you? He would have time then..
T. Oster: Sounds good, thank you. Also, What about Baldurs Gate 3?
Secretary: ...Excuse me?
T. Oster: I would like to know if we could make that game.
Secretary: I ...don't know?
T. Oster: Thank you, have a nice day. *click*
Intellectual property rights have many forms and there can be an agreement between the interested parties affecting all, several or only one of them. Copyright Law of the United States grants certain rights to the owner of a copyright in a work:
- the right to reproduce the copyrighted work;
- the right to prepare derivative works based upon the work;
- the right to distribute copies of the work to the public;
- the right to perform the copyrighted work publicly;
- the right to display the copyrighted work publicly.
The distribution right grants to the copyright holder the right to make a work available to the public by sale, rental, lease, or lending.
This right allows the copyright holder to prevent the distribution of unauthorized copies of a work.
Taking into account Atari distributed BG:EE and it was Atari who demanded Beamdog to stop selling the game we can come to a conclusion that Atari definitely owned - at least - one intellectual property right that was the distribution right.
And this particular right or even the certain scope of it could be sold.
I thought WoTC owned intellectual property rights as well (but these rights were different).
The main question during the Atari bankruptcy and EE hiatus was "What will happen to the distribution rights affecting EEs".
https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/comment/327648#Comment_327648
After that I found this site.
I studied it for several days then.
As it followed from the Atari Interactive Inc Schedules, there was an executory contract between Atari Interactive Inc and Beamdog. BTW, Jalily's answer here showed we indeed could talk about an executory contract between these two parties - taking into account that a debtor in a chapter 11 bankruptcy case was able to unilaterally terminate an executory contract and minimize the financial impact of the default, sell and assign an executory contract to a third party, even though the contract had a provision which otherwise prohibits assignment.
So, as it could be seen from the Atari Interactive Inc Schedules, there was a Baldur's Gate Sublicense Agreement. And the nature of Debtor's (Atari's) interest in this contract is a License.
We know that a license may be granted by one party - a licensor - to another party - a licensee. And because the contract between Atari and Beamdog was a Sublicense Agreement, I came to a conclusion that Atari was not a licensor, it was a licensee (!).
So, an ultimate license holder (and owner) of Baldur's Gate was Hasbro not Atari. This page confirmed it also, naming Hasbro.
https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/comment/329005/#Comment_329005
So, after that it became clear that the main owner of Baldur's Gate was Hasbro (or - taking into account Cerevant's answer here - Wizards of the Coast, its subsidiary) and Beamdog had a good relationship with them. As Trent himself said: "We went down to visit the Wizards fellows a few short weeks ago and we all get along smashingly well".
https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/comment/329023/#Comment_329023
I think that after Beamdog concluded a new contract with Hasbro/Wizards of the Coast, Atari completely went away from picture. Beamdog got its own distribution rights regarding BG.
Now, with SoD, Atari cannot be involved in any manner. I think it didn't get any rights from Hasbro/Wizards of the Coast, Beamdog are the Developers and can sell the game themselves.
By the way, Andrew Foley confirmed that there's no corporate drama (such as it was the case with Atari in the summer of 2013) in the background now. And no pressure to release before the expansion is ready, which is a good thing.
https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/comment/655672/#Comment_655672