Post

This issue is one of the most important to me, personally. I had to sacrifice a lot to work at Wizards. I wrote a really funny twine game last year and had several more in the works. I stopped work on all of them when I became a D&D game designer. I lost a creative outlet that was important to me.

United Wizards of the Coast - CWA@uwotc-official.bsky.social

Currently, Hasbro’s guidelines keep us from having total ownership over the work we make in our free time. Our union aims to change that and ensure we own what we make in our free time. actionnetwork.org/forms/uwotcp...

112 reposts284 likes

I think you're actually the reason I first learned abt this (heinous, horrible) policy! as I recall you pub'd something like...literally the day before your contract started? and mentioned you wished you'd had more time to finish it. you should have all the time in the world!!!

Doom of the Dragon Grafter! I actually put together a whole pitch document for the full lvl 1-10 adventure. Had already reached out to a few close friends about working on it with me. If I hadn’t gotten this job, I likely would‘ve crowdfunded it.

Not that I think in a million years I’d ever run a whole crowdfunding campaign as an fte, but it would have been nice to keep it as a side project for a rainy day. when I signed the offer I asked myself “what can I get done in one month?” and did that.

I see language all the time about how ”that’s how it is in corporate games.” I would like to see more people asking “but what if it wasn’t like that?” and “How can we change it?”

That's so fuck up, how is that legal to claim ownership of something people do when they are not at work, and not using resources from their workplace? That's wild, if they want to claim ownership of the work you do when you're not at work, they should pay you when you're off work too.

it’s legal because people agree to it and are in theory compensated for it. but in the games industry and others, it makes no sense. you can’t copyright game mechanics! these clauses make sense where patents are involved & multimillion dollar R&D budgets (and again *everyone is paid for the rights*)

I won't speak to whether there might be a context in which it would make sense: But I do know that it has become *endemic* in tech startup circles, beyond all common sense. I've seen legal departments claim that *music people composed* was work-for-hire when they were hired as coders. It's nuts.

yeah, the music example is pretty plainly absurd. the scope should always be (very narrowly) defined by the clause if and when people choose to accept these clauses in their contracts. did that hold up in court?