Why can't they? I own a thing, you did a thing which hurt the value of that thing. We can put values on used cars, priceless art, but not trading cards? Someone should notify TCG player.Originally Posted by Michael Keller
This is all tounge-in-cheek tho: Because like you said, all law is determined by a judge.
Little, unless you mean collectively, then a lot. But good luck getting two magic players to agree on anything.
I'm being serious, though. Everything is just here-say. People are saying, "Well, people will sue Wizards for breaking the RL." Okay, so let's say for argument's sake that they break it. Then "collectors" (whomever that is, which to me sounds shady because it's a generality) would sue.
First off, has anyone publicly come out stating they will sue Wizards that has the bankroll in RL cards to make it worthwhile? I honestly and truly believe it would never happen. I really believe it's like some wive's tale that people still cling to because it's the default thought.
The reason this pisses me off is not just because I love Legacy, but I've devoted years of my life to playing the format. I can accept it dying. What I can't accept is that it's been treated like a piece of shit by WOTC and given a negative stigma because of their own dumb mistake - the RL. And make no mistake - it has been treated like shit. It's the bastard child of every competitive endeavor because Modern and Standard get the spotlight. That's perfectly fine if the formats had equal footing, but they don't. And that's why the RL needs to go - to allow all older Eternal formats the experience for newer players.
My point again is that if the intent is to "get rid of it," then get rid of it and end it.
That's a huge problem.
While it seems like a joke, promissory estoppel is an actual legal principle*.
But you miss the actual point. The actual point is that rescinding the Reserve List does not fit into their business model and likely for the reason that it would not be as lucrative as the model they currently have. Even if it were, it carries risk, both of (likely frivolous, but still existent) legal action and no clear ROIC over time. You aren't going to sell the shareholders on that.
Let's be 100% clear. Hasbro does not care about you, or me, or SCG, they don't care about the Pope, nor Legacy players, nor your neighbor's cat. They care about shareholders and their P&L statements. Full stop.
Part of it, in my strict opinion, is that Hasbro/Wizards wants no legal scrutiny passed over it's distribution model, especially given the current scrutiny being paid to video game loot boxes and the always tangential issue of it being labeled "gambling" (I believe tournaments still fall under this in Germany, for example) to which they want absolutely no chance of either having to disclose evidence, nor gain the attention of jumpy law-makers. Wizards is the cash-cow of Hasbro, they are not going to be anything but conservative to even mild risk.
*I'm not a lawyer, this isn't actual legal advice.
"The Ancients teach us that if we can but last, we shall prevail."
—Kaysa, Elder Druid of the Juniper Order
There are, it would. I happen to think that they Wizards would win in the end but IANAL.
Honestly, even if the Reserved List was somehow abolished, there is the issue of actually reprinting the cards.
What would be the motive when it is far easier for them to follow the traditional model that centers around Standard and Limited?
I completely understand you. But this isn't about them "caring," I'm speaking strictly from a legality perspective. The point is that if a collector wields that kind of power, then a player should, too. I get that they won't do anything; I'm saying to force them to.
It's not collectors who will sue Wizards, it's other companies like SCG and Channel fireball who will argue that they made purchases of products given certain assurances by WOTC, and that when WOTC changed their policy they lost X dollars as measured by the current price of Underground Seas based on their price the day prior to the announcement.
And then either wizards will settle and we'll never know the details (Just like we don't know the details around the court case that created the reserved list to begin with) or they will lose because no matter how many times they shout the words "promissory estopple" to anyone who listens it turns out that the company who already amended their promises on a whim can continue doing so, especially when backed by the power of an 11 billion dollar corporation.
Good luck trying to collect torts from an 11 billion dollar company.
All roads lead to format innovation. That is something WE control and the timing would be excellent now with Pioneer’s announcement and SCGs announcement
Because promissory estoppel likely passes an evidentiary hearing and so could actually lead to a trial.
Suing because you play a game and would like the company to sell you more game pieces has no legal basis, since there wasn't even the semblance of promise or an agreement on either party's behalf in this case. Therefor, there is essentially no legal grounds to bring a case on. Again, I'm definitely not a lawyer, but at best, it seems you'd waste a couple hours on the part of Hasbro's legal team.
What you actually want to do, is more akin to this quote from Carl Sandburg:
"If the facts are against you, argue the law. If the law is against you, argue the facts. If the law and the facts are against you, pound the table and yell like hell."
You have no facts on your side and you definitely don't have the law. So, if you actually wanted to do something, you need to find somewhere to bang the table and yell as loud as you can. But I think you'll find the court of public opinion both vastly deaf to the plight and profoundly uncaring.
"The Ancients teach us that if we can but last, we shall prevail."
—Kaysa, Elder Druid of the Juniper Order
Incorrect: The company announces all the time their plan to make more game pieces. The same concept of promissory estoppel applies here.
From a business point, getting rid of RL only makes sense if: [Profits from new print run of RL cards] > ([Litigation costs and eventual settlement of potential class action]+[print runs of RL cards]+[promotion of legacy events]).
Any PE suit will be unlikely to succeed, but modern litigation is such that companies will always settle any such suit as a nuisance concern. Thus, the concern for the above isn't "damages upon loss" but "Legal expenses billed hourly until settlement + Settlement cost". On a business concern, you additionally have to add in the imaginary expense of "man hours and firm resources devoted to litigation" which are not insignificant (discovery, depositions, teleconferences, meetings, review of filings, travel, etc), further you have to include the imaginary cost of time value of money and the what other projects those hours and time could've been spent on, i.e. all the money that could've been used for something else and all those hours and efforts that could've been used for something else. They have to be sure of allocating resources to make profits this way otherwise they will just funnel resources to efforts that are more likely to yield profits. So the formula looks more like:
[Profits from new print run of RL cards] > ([Legal expenses billed hourly until settlement ]+[Settlement Cost]+[print runs of RL cards]+[promotion of legacy events]+[Cost of Misdirected Hours/Time]+[Lost opportunities])*([Percentage likelihood of [Profits from new print run of RL cards]>[Lost opportunities]]).
If it's an 11 billion dollar company, legal action from Mom and Dad in the Adirondacks isn't going to break the bank.
So what you are saying is that the basis of your case is that they the announced they'd make more game pieces and then did? What are your damages in this case?
No, you'd have to make the case that they somehow promised to make certain specific game pieces and then didn't. Except they never did that. Or, if they did, no one ever heard it.
They did, on the other hand, expressly state they would not make certain specific game pieces. And they don't (anymore) post-closing the Foil "loophole." That's the case that could be made with some likely weight of law. Just because no one took action based on Phyrexian Dreadnaughts, doesn't mean it couldn't have been done.
Then again, as I said, I am not a lawyer, so do your best Johnnie Cochran and go get 'em if you have the superior understanding and grasp of the facts of the matter.
"The Ancients teach us that if we can but last, we shall prevail."
—Kaysa, Elder Druid of the Juniper Order
There's another aspect to this that is going unsaid. The fact that there are cards worth thousands, tens of thousands, and even hundreds of thousands gives legitimacy to the price of all of the other cards. In a world where Black Lotus is $50, everything else becomes dirt. So WOTC has an incentive to continue with the RL for this reason as well.
As a result of the RL, Legacy has to die sooner or later. The hope is WOTC can use Modern Horizons to turn Modern into Legacy. The path is easily there for them to create the same gameplay as in Legacy without the problems of the RL. It honestly would only take the printing of a dozen or so cards into the format and some unbannings. People like yourself who are heavily invested could easily transition to this format.
This approach makes a lot of sense because, right now, Modern is a dumpster fire of a format that cannot self-regulate. Also, it seems they are hoping Pioneer ends up being what Modern should have been.
I actually disagree completely. Generally speaking, it's significantly easier to collect from big companies as compared to small ones.
Small ones don't have deep pockets. Small ones tend to hire shadier lawyers and employ shadier tactics in litigation.
With big companies you know exactly what you're gonna get: a big law firm that will waste your time but without doing anything truly shady followed by a pay out once the big firm has made their billables.
There's a variety of other factors that lead to this result e.g. big companies care more about public perception; big companies are more likely to look at things rationally (dollars and cents) versus emotionally (vendetta motives).
The facts actually fit promissory estoppel pretty well. It's a colorable argument to say the least.
The elements of promissory estoppel are (1) a promise, (2) the promisor should reasonably expect the promise to induce action or forbearance on the part of the promisee or a third person, (3) the promise induces action or forbearance by the promisee or a third person, and (4) injustice can be avoided only by enforcement of the promise.
You can see how this works in this instance: (1) WOTC promises to maintain the RL in perpetuity; (2) WOTC should reasonably expect collectors to purchase RL cards based on that promise; (3) collectors actually do buy RL cards based on that promise; (4) injustice results when WOTC eliminates the RL because collector's investments in RL cards plummet as a result of the broken promise.
That is not at all the case which I was considering. The hypothetical case I was considering was Michael Keller's where players sue for Legacy not be "supported" with reprints, not the breaking of the Reserve List. We all already know that of breaking the RL has enough merit to be heard.
"The Ancients teach us that if we can but last, we shall prevail."
—Kaysa, Elder Druid of the Juniper Order
So what? They don't care, as people keep saying: they're a business and they're only ethics are "will this enrich our s shareholders"
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote