Reply To: Could Heroquest be finally coming back again?

[ced1106Participant 6224xp 0]

> – Made in conjunction with Games Workshop does not grant GW the rights to basically anything.

fwiw, GW had some sort of rights to Fimir (and other monsters in HQ?). Of course, just because the HQ rulebook doesn’t mention such-and-such rights for GW, doesn’t mean they don’t have them, including because they filed some sort of IP protection for the name. (RG, also of course, can use non-GW names for its monsters, such as lizardmen for Fimir, and Evil Warriors for Chaos Warriors. I guess most HQ fans wouldn’t mind?)

https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/1621361/fimir-are-back

https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/1072359/heroquest-legal-discussion

> Why would they want to use an existing game and re-theme it when they can make one of their own using their own ip/copyright?

Yes, actions like RG are definitely the exception, especially with HQ’s murky legal past. I would think most IP lawyers are more interested in making a good living, than found a game company for much more work and potentially less income! (Of course, the lawyer / founder of RG may have done enough work as an IP lawyer that he could fulfill a dream of bringing back his favorite childhood games.)

btw, Merchants of Venus was a IP headache as well, with the designer thinking he had the rights, and licensing them to Stronghold Games, while the publisher, Hasbro, who bought Avalon Hill’s game rights, licensed the rights to FFG. Both Stronghold and FFG announced publication of the game nearly at the same time, and they came to an amicable negotiation. (aka. AH contracts are as ironclad as a rusted sieve and Hasbro has better lawyers. 😛

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/55141-im-confused-stronghold-vs-ffg/

https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/news/2012/6/27/galactic-trade-resumes/