Looney Labs Fluxx Mailing list Archive

Re: [Fluxx] Zombies Eat Brains - Non Attributed?

  • FromCarl Worth <cworth@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • DateMon, 19 Nov 2007 14:38:06 -0800
On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 15:58:03 -0600, "Chris Kice" wrote:
> At the first GenCon I attended, he showed me a copy of one of his custom
> cards that had been autographed by Andy - one called "Zombies Eat Brains".
> (Andy wrote about meeting Josh in that week's Thought Residue:
> http://www.wunderland.com/WhatsOld/2002/WN.08.15.02.html).

The page says:

 	The funniest new Fluxx goal idea I've heard in a while
 	was suggested by Josh Berling: Zombies Eat Brains! The
 	player who has Death on the table wins if the Brain is
 	on the table.

> Now, Looney Labs just used Zombies Eat Brains as a promo card with no
> attribution to Josh.

There are a range of plausible scenarios that need not include any
malicious intent:

  * With Zombie Fluxx having injected the concept of "zombies" into
    the game, someone else independently thought up the combination of
    the existing Death and Brain keepers.

  * As above, but the person had originally heard of the card directly
    or indirectly from Josh, and had forgotten about that.

  * Andy could have remembered, and been grateful for, Josh's
    contribution but didn't think any further attribution was
    necessary. (He had originally given the above attribution over 5
    years ago, presumably the same week Josh met Andy. And he's still
    giving it out by making that page available.)

> This seems so un-Looney-like and has really gotten under my skin.

You obviously have high regard for the Looneys, and they way they
treat their customers and fans. And I assume you expect kind treatment
from them, even above and beyond what would legally be required. (All
of which I'd tend to agree with from what I've seen.)

You also seem to be assuming some other scenario with malicious intent
on their part. The fact that the wunderland.com continues to attribute
Josh for the original invention of this goal suggests that nobody's
actively trying to hide that fact.

> I'm posting here just to vent and test the waters to see
> anyone thinks I'm overreacting.

From my point of view, (not a party to any of this, but a reader of
the list and player of Fluxx), you might be. Given the Looney track
record, I would be more inclined to not assume malicious intent. I do
wonder what form of additional attribution you might have
expected. Here are some possibilities:

  * A note on the bottom of the card?

    It's hard to imagine that Andy hasn't gotten at least one idea for
    a published card from someone else, but there aren't any other
    named credits in the published game materials, that I recall. So
    this would seem without precedent.

  * A "Thanks, Josh!" note on the bottom of the postcard?

    That certainly would have been a kind gesture, and would seem very
    Looney-like in my book. As I described above, it's possible this
    was simply an oversight.

  * A similar note on the webpage with a link back to the page
    mentioned above?

    This also would have been nice, and is one option that could still
    be put in place.

Whichever is the case, you might have chosen to bring the issue up
privately first, ("Hey Andy, did you remember when Josh gave you the
'Zombies Eat Brains' card idea?...").


Attachment: pgp3srvMH0iIF.pgp
Description: PGP signature