The 1980 Deposition

[The Perilous Dreamer]

Feb 16, 2024 23:54:14 GMT -5 @jamesdixon said:

I read the letter from Gary to Dave. Gary was encouraging Dave to write more about Blackmoor for publication. He was very supportive of Dave's work.

I'm up to the deposition on page 135 which is November 28, 1980. All three of the authors from Don't Give Up The Ship were given 15 shares stock instead of a royalty payment. I'm not really seeing anything that shows Gary to be this monster that he's portrayed as during this time frame.

I have not read that far, just skimmed through the document.

Once hopefully several people have it, I want to start more discussion. You have one started right here, once we catch up to you on the reading.

[The Perilous Dreamer]

Feb 17, 2024 0:37:07 GMT -5 @jamesdixon said:

Well the 1980 deposition is interesting while being 82 pages long. A deposition from July 19, 1979. I'm going to stop there.

It is really interesting to see how things fell apart between Gary and Dave. Ultimately it was down to money and Dave unwilling to sign a work for hire agreement as required for employment with TSR. Said work for hire agreement is the standard then and now.

Yeah, it is standard and it is not a good deal for creative people or for inventive people. Work for hire is a way to pay a pittance and in some cases these days make hundreds of millions or even billions on the back of someone making less than six figures a year and not even high five figures a year.

[Admin Pete]

This thread is for the 1980 Deposition. The 1979 Deposition should have its own thread.

[captainjapan]

So, are we reading Gary's second draft or Dave's first revision? I can't see where the exhibit numbering lines up. See excerpt, below:

Dave Arneson's 1980 deposition, pgs.207-209, approx.

Paul Puerner, attorney for Dave Arneson questioning Dave about the draft rules:

I show you a -- which is going to be stapled together --packet of documents which have been marked as one exhibit, number 21; could you tell me what this is?

Arneson: This is a copy of an early manuscript of "Dungeons and Dragons" provided to me by Mr. Gygax for my editing and reviewal.

Now, I recall in your prior deposition you said there were several drafts of the work before it went to press, so-to-speak; would this be the first draft? Can you identify it as such?

Judging by what I have been able to read in this draft, it would either be the first or second draft provided to me.

All right. Could we have the original of this? I'd just like to -- is that laying here someplace?

MR. WEINSTEIN (attorney for Gary Gygax): Do we have that?

MR. PUERNER: Yes. I saw it this morning.

MR. HIRSCH: It's in there.

MR. WEINSTEIN: Okay.

BY MR. PUERNER, (Continuing) Now, you say this was submitted to you by Mr. Gygax

Yes, Sir

Would you explain in more detail just what you did after you received this?

I would have gone through it, sir, page by page making any corrections and additions and provided those corrections and additions to Mr. Gygax.

Q Now, are the corrections and additions that you refer to actually on this document, or are they separate from it?

A No, sir. They would have been provided separately to Mr. Gygax.

And I assume from your previous testimony that you no longer have a copy of these additions and corrections?

That is correct.

Well, is it because you just simply did not make a copy before you returned it to Mr. Gygax?

That is correct, sir.

MR. WEINSTEIN: Excuse me. With regard to this document that were referring: to; vs. "the particular original" to which Mr. Puerner was referring, is that the actual document provided to you by Mr. Gygax, or was that a retyped version, or do you know?

Arneson: I am not sure. On two occasions portions were completely retyped by either myself or one of the wives of local friends who would have done that. My supposition would be that since this is an original that the carbon would have been provided to Mr. Gygax which would indicate that this is actually my revision of what he had given me on what would be, I believe as I said, the second draft.

[Admin Pete]

Feb 21, 2024 13:49:33 GMT -5 captainjapan said:

So, are we reading Gary's second draft or Dave's first revision? I can't see where the exhibit numbering lines up. See excerpt, below:

That is a really good question, my guess is that it is Dave's first revision, but it does not seem to be all that clear.

[The Perilous Dreamer]

Feb 21, 2024 14:23:33 GMT -5 Admin Pete said:

Feb 21, 2024 13:49:33 GMT -5 captainjapan said:

So, are we reading Gary's second draft or Dave's first revision? I can't see where the exhibit numbering lines up. See excerpt, below:

That is a really good question, my guess is that it is Dave's first revision, but it does not seem to be all that clear.

Seems to me that Arneson's lawyer should have nailed all that down before they were before the judge.

[Morose]

Feb 17, 2024 0:37:07 GMT -5 @jamesdixon said:

Well the 1980 deposition is interesting while being 82 pages long. A deposition from July 19, 1979. I'm going to stop there.

It is really interesting to see how things fell apart between Gary and Dave. Ultimately it was down to money and Dave unwilling to sign a work for hire agreement as required for employment with TSR. Said work for hire agreement is the standard then and now.

Work for hire is always a bad deal for creative work. The only odd thing is that Gary was willing to sign as work for hire himself. I suppose since it was his company and he and his best friend Don Kaye owned 2/3s of it, it never occurred to him that would come back to bite him. Lesson for everyone, if you start a company, you license your creative work to the company for a set period of time. If you lose control of the company then at some point they will have to negotiate with you. Never sign up for work for hire, if you have a choice and if you are founding a company, there if no where else, you have a choice.

[Morose]

Feb 21, 2024 13:49:33 GMT -5 captainjapan said:

So, are we reading Gary's second draft or Dave's first revision? I can't see where the exhibit numbering lines up. See excerpt, below:

And I assume from your previous testimony that you no longer have a copy of these additions and corrections?

That is correct.

Well, is it because you just simply did not make a copy before you returned it to Mr. Gygax?

That is correct, sir.

Another lesson to be learned, keep copies of everything. Of course that is much easier to do today that is was in the early 1970s.