It allows you to search the
messageboards, send and receive private messages, give yourself a
custom usertitle, turn ads on or off, create a custom style for your
profile, get a nifty badge under your username, and gives you a special
warm glowy feeling! Oh, and it gets rid of this annoying message, too!
RPG Legalities: OGF/4eGSL/d20STLDiscussions about the Open Gaming Movement, the Open Gaming License, along with WotC's GSL. This is the new home of the OGF-L and d20-L listserver discussions.
Did you mean GSL and not OGL? Goodman is going to use the OGL for everything they release prior to October. At which time, they will sign on to the GSL (see the Ogrecave podcast for info straight from the horses mouth). this could make things interesting.
Far more interesting to me is the implications of what Joe did in creating 4e compatible material using open content released through the OGL, something I just never thought about. And it makes sense; the OGL has no clause against redefining terms, nor does it care if the terms make sense in terms of the system they are being used for. So yeah, like GG did, you can have a OGL-released statblock using OGC terms with values that make no sense if used in 3.X because they are meant to be used with 4e. That could be, I think, a far safer way to release 4e-compatible content than going copyright if you don't have a lawyer at hand to make sure you are kosher.
I wonder how well this would work for the other parts of 4e (powers, classes, paragon paths, epic destinies, etc.).
Far more interesting to me is the implications of what Joe did in creating 4e compatible material using open content released through the OGL, something I just never thought about. And it makes sense; the OGL has no clause against redefining terms, nor does it care if the terms make sense in terms of the system they are being used for. So yeah, like GG did, you can have a OGL-released statblock using OGC terms with values that make no sense if used in 3.X because they are meant to be used with 4e. That could be, I think, a far safer way to release 4e-compatible content than going copyright if you don't have a lawyer at hand to make sure you are kosher.
This is not different from "going copyright" - it is "going copyright". Because it is producing material that is potentially derivative of 4e (in which WoTC holds whatever IP rights there are) without a licence to produce such derivative material. All the OGL does is license reproduction of WoTC's copyrighted SRD. It doesn't make it any less problematic to produce material that is derivative of the 4e texts.
Except that you can derive material from the 3.5 OGL and the multitude of amazing 3PP products out there that pushed the limits of what 3.5 provided. From Iron Heroes to Book of Experimental Might and others, recreating 4E is just a matter of time.
__________________ Andreas Rönnqvist Dreamscarred Press
New publishing with a focus on Psionics
This is not different from "going copyright" - it is "going copyright". Because it is producing material that is potentially derivative of 4e (in which WoTC holds whatever IP rights there are) without a licence to produce such derivative material. All the OGL does is license reproduction of WoTC's copyrighted SRD. It doesn't make it any less problematic to produce material that is derivative of the 4e texts.
Nope, using the OGL as Goodman did and as I'm describing is definitely NOT going copyright. By using the OGL and OGC as your source for the description of the material you are well within your legal rights as an user of the OGL. The OGL does not demand that the values assigned to the OGC terms be compatible with whatever system they were drawn from, so I could technically grab some OGC from Spirit of the Century and have the values assigned to it be compatible with 3.X or something else. That's all fine and dandy.
The one potential problem I could see is with the compatibility claim. Since "4e" is not a copyrighted/trademarked term, it technically does not violate the applicable clause in the OGL.
HalWhitewyrm is correct. Numerical values are not covered in the GSL. The problem is where the stat block formats differ. 4e stat block format is unique to 4e, so they will still have to use the 3e mechanics of the 3e stat block to do the best they can to mimic the 4e stat block without duplicating it. Terms like "bloodied" would not be allowed on a 3e stat block.
I don't think that it's as easy as Angellis and HalWhitewyrm are saying. The OGL does not license violations of copyright. It does license use of certain copyrighted material. What happens if a publisher's use of copyrighted material X (eg SRD, other OGL products) results in a product which arguably violates the copyright in non-licensed product Y (eg the 4e books)? That is a technical question in the law of copyright which can't be answered without proper legal advice in my opinion.
That is a technical question in the law of copyright which can't be answered without proper legal advice in my opinion.
QFT.
That said, I think there is an amount of safe harbor in using the OGL. You have to get creative on various aspects to produce 4e-usable material using OGL-licensed sources, but I don't think it's impossible. One of the reasons I am eagerly awaiting Gen Con is because I want to see how Goodman Games went about this.
I don't think that it's as easy as Angellis and HalWhitewyrm are saying. The OGL does not license violations of copyright. It does license use of certain copyrighted material. What happens if a publisher's use of copyrighted material X (eg SRD, other OGL products) results in a product which arguably violates the copyright in non-licensed product Y (eg the 4e books)? That is a technical question in the law of copyright which can't be answered without proper legal advice in my opinion.
Think about it like this...if the 4E OGL publisher wants to create new material Z and uses copyrighted (but properly licensed under OGL) material X that violates any supposed copyright material Y owned within the 4E books....inherently, and by definition, the 4E books are violating the copyright of the original OGL publisher of copyrighed material X.
The point in using OGL to produce 4E compliant material is that, ostensibly, any OGC that is useful in createing 4E compliant OGL material would have been produced legally prior to the publication of the 4E books. Therefore, liability lies with WOTC and its 4E publications, not the newly derived work material Z.
What I'm saying is that it is not possible for me to use material X to violate copyright on material Y. I mean, I'm sure there is some possible convoluted way to make this happen. But the point is that it should not be possible, and the intent here is to use previously published open material to create new material compatible with 4E system. ....Use old open material to make new material for a closed system.
We've been over this before. Maybe I'm missing something. If so, my apologies.
__________________ Again, you could play this as just a flat series of die rolls, but if that's all you want to do, why are you playing a RPG? - Keith Baker
Think about it like this...if the 4E OGL publisher wants to create new material Z and uses copyrighted (but properly licensed under OGL) material X that violates any supposed copyright material Y owned within the 4E books....inherently, and by definition, the 4E books are violating the copyright of the original OGL publisher of copyrighed material X.
I don't think you are correct here, because 4e may not be derivative of the OGL material (and thus not in violation) but my new material (Z in your example) may be derivative of both the OGL material and 4e, and hence in violation of WoTC's copyright.
The key is that - as I understand it - the question of whether something is derivative of another's copyright doesn't depend just on its content, but the process that led to it.
The licenses are not to be mixed. Material that floats under copyright law is not restricted by the 4e GSL. The GSL says not to mix the OGL with the GSL, that is, one license is not to be shared with the other. So anything that requires you to post the OGL in your product cannot be used with anything that requires you to post the GSL in your product. Copyright law withstands, as it is not bound by either license.
Last edited by Corjay; 4th August 2008 at 06:47 PM..
Anything prohibited by the GSL is most easily ignored by not signing the GSL.
The issue here is that, currently, the only real answer to all our questions is "you need a lawyer for that".
This is the real dampener. And it doesn't make sense for each party to have to pay legal fees, when one could do it and then release the guidelines on the net.
In other words, what is needed is an OGL product which covers 4E. Then everybody can use that without each having to consult a lawyer.
Technically, they're "going copyright", but with the significant hurdle of lawyer expenses.
As long as this is not in place, the suits at Wizards has nothing to worry about. Not everyone has the legal resources of Kenzer or Goodman, so the thriving 3PP market will wither and die.
For anyone that doesn't sign the 4e GSL, they still need a lawyer if they want to implement parts of the system without violating copyright. The problem still persists. An OGL isn't going to stop that. What you mean is that the clause in the 4e GSL about not mixing the OGL and the GSL needs to be lifted. You can lift that without backstepping the GSL to the OGL.
The issue here is that, currently, the only real answer to all our questions is "you need a lawyer for that".
This is the real dampener. And it doesn't make sense for each party to have to pay legal fees, when one could do it and then release the guidelines on the net.
In other words, what is needed is an OGL product which covers 4E. Then everybody can use that without each having to consult a lawyer.
Technically, they're "going copyright", but with the significant hurdle of lawyer expenses.
But who would use material produced under the OGL, but potentially in breach of WoTC's IP rights in respect of 4e, without getting legal advice? Even if such a person could be confident that the "OGL product that covers 4e" is not itself in violation (and wouldn't most publishers be hesitant to accept this just on another's say-so?), there would be the question of whether the material they intended to produce, which developed the underlying OGL product, was itself not in violation of WoTC's rights.
The issue here is that, currently, the only real answer to all our questions is "you need a lawyer for that".
This is the real dampener. And it doesn't make sense for each party to have to pay legal fees, when one could do it and then release the guidelines on the net.
This is very wrong. Having the lawyer doesn't make it legal. It just means you've paid someone who is willing to stand up in court and say "we think this is legal." It isn't actually legal until there's a court ruling. So going this path still means retaining the services of a lawyer.
The answers lawyers give you are only binary when something is definitely illegal. Most of the law involving IP is gray and just because you have a lawyer who thinks you aren't violating anyone's copyrights or trademarks doesn't make it true.
__________________ Joe Mucchiello, Head Honcho at Throwing Dice Games
Priority One: Fatherhood.
Priority Two: Sanity.
Down on the list: seemingly real close to releasing a notebook essential. It's in layout! Has been for months now. (Just nod politely so I won't cry about this.)
"I've never heard of the term Flavor lawyer..." -- Scribble
Linear Mode
