Re: [ImmoderateHeroQuest] Re: Why...

From: Nick Brooke <Nick_at_e1cYY_EqWuUrUiHAV-BaJnokANqRm9rJ5cybMoZ8S-WQ7McKV93GsXjWt4uE3A-1jMFQkoM>
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 20:17:46 +0100


Tim Ellis wrote:

> OK, now I understand. But still, this isn't a gripe in particular
> with the FPP, since the work you did on the Carmanians and the
> Malkioni pre-dates it, more with the way that Greg and/or Issaries
> have delt with you in this case. In fact the FPP is a step
> forwards, since now it admits up front that they can do this, so
> you'll know that, to quote Sam Goldwyn, a verbal contract is not
> worth the paper it's written on, and to get Greg to agree to crrdit
> you in writing next time!

Wrong: I had Greg's agreement to credit me in writing, both times. It just didn't seem to matter to him that he'd given that agreement.

The FPP is a step backward. I am not giving Greg/Issaries any "Concept Use Statement" in respect of my work, as this would reward their past transgressions and open the way to future rippings-off.

Cheers, Nick            

Powered by hypermail