Return to revision history
Revision as of 15:39:13, 31 March 2026 by Lboland
Revision as of 15:45:01, 31 March 2026 by Lboland
This revision marked as completed.
Line 33: Line 33:
insist on payment for the prototype and agree to have that payment come
insist on payment for the prototype and agree to have that payment come
out of royalties if the game is published; he liked this idea.
out of royalties if the game is published; he liked this idea.
<br>He wanted me to send him a letter saying that the game was very original and
very marketable. I said that noone knew what was marketable - that I would send
him a repro [reproduction] of my diary entry on the game, in which I said that it was
innovative. He asked about a lawyer and I suggested the one <u>Gini Scott</u> wrote
me about - <u>Michael Padway</u> - or even better <u>Carl Person</u>. Gave him their
addresses and telephone numbers. Asked him please not to mention my name.
<br>Call from <u>Carl Person</u> (actually after <u>Vincent Murtha</u> got here). he was contacted
by Roger and will handle his case. I said that I had specifically asked Roger not to
mention me. Person said that he understood my reluctance at being involved
and would never mention me without my consent. Thanked him, and said that in
any case I have never found game companies to be dishonest. He said that he felt that
if a theme were presented by an independent, a company might give that theme to a Marvin
Glass to develop. He asked if I knew of anyone who would qualify as an "expert" and
would be willing to testify. I suggested <u>Gini Scott</u> as a possibility, and told him that
he could contact her thru <u>Michael Padway</u>. He was very pleasant and said that if I
ever needed any legal questions answered, just give him a call and he'd answer me on the
phone.
Visit from <u>Vincent Murtha</u>. Didn't get exactly what he had in mind -
something about merchandising me as an apostle of a new trend in
games - cooperative rather than competitive. Tried to tell him that it
<br>(cont. on 4/1)