babomb
First Post
IANAL, but I take in interest in legal matters. This is not legal advice.
Strictly speaking, I think you're correct based on the wording of the agreement. However, the FAQ specifically allows making copies for your group as long as they've all signed up.
They're not technically employing you. "Work-for-hire" is a standard legal term that basically just means they own the copyright outright. Under US law, works created by employees are "works-for-hire" and the copyright belongs to the company, whereas works created by freelancers are owned by the freelancer, unless there is an agreement to the contrary. This is a little redundant with the part that says they own the copyright on your submissions, but they're basically just making sure they cover all their bases here.
I don't think that's the meaning of derivative works here. Derivative work is a term in copyright law. Creating your own monster using the rules is not a derivative work, because the rules can't be copyrighted, only the expression of them. A derivative work would be copying parts of the playtest material and incorporating it into your own RPG. Theoretically, you could create your own RPG with the same rules as long as your careful not to explain them too similarly. (That wouldn't be ethical, but I think it would be both legal and not a violation of this agreement.)
They can kick you out of the playtest, but they can do that for any reason, including not liking your face.
They could also sue you for breach of contract. My understanding, which may be wrong, is that breach of contract in the absence of a penalty clause generally only recovers actual damages (including, e.g., damage to Wizards of the Coast's reputation), and punitive damages only kick in if you're deemed to have breached it maliciously. Maybe I'm wrong, but if I were a juror, you'd have a hard time convincing me that actual damage for you playing over the Internet amounts to much. I'm also not convinced the agreement prohibits playing over the Internet despite the FAQ's claims otherwise. But it wouldn't really be worth going to court to test it.
If you reproduce a portion of the materials that is too large to be fair use, they could sue you for copyright infringement, which can include substantial statutory damages.
Of course, most likely, if they found you've violated the agreement, they would first send you a letter demanding you take it down (or send a DMCA notice to the website demanding they take it down). They would probably only sue if you persisted.
That appears to mean that if you print out copies of the rules and give them to your players, you just violated the agreement. Your players must have their own copies of the rules.
Strictly speaking, I think you're correct based on the wording of the agreement. However, the FAQ specifically allows making copies for your group as long as they've all signed up.
FAQ said:(This does not limit participants from making copies of playtest documents for the sole purpose of sharing them with their gaming group provided they have all signed up to playtest D&D Next.)
Wizards is technically employing you."Work-for-hire"? Man, talk about not paying a living wage! Also, apparently you give Wizards some limited power of attorney and they own the copyright on anything you give them.
They're not technically employing you. "Work-for-hire" is a standard legal term that basically just means they own the copyright outright. Under US law, works created by employees are "works-for-hire" and the copyright belongs to the company, whereas works created by freelancers are owned by the freelancer, unless there is an agreement to the contrary. This is a little redundant with the part that says they own the copyright on your submissions, but they're basically just making sure they cover all their bases here.
You can't modify or make new stuff. Want to make your own monster? Want to swap race and class? Want to invent a spear? NO. DO NOT. IT IS A VIOLATION, FOLKS. You can't create derivative materials.
I don't think that's the meaning of derivative works here. Derivative work is a term in copyright law. Creating your own monster using the rules is not a derivative work, because the rules can't be copyrighted, only the expression of them. A derivative work would be copying parts of the playtest material and incorporating it into your own RPG. Theoretically, you could create your own RPG with the same rules as long as your careful not to explain them too similarly. (That wouldn't be ethical, but I think it would be both legal and not a violation of this agreement.)
I'm a little vague on what happens if you DO violate the agreement -- if WotC's Fun Police will come to your house on Saturday if you make copies and give them to your group and run the game with invented monsters, put you in handcuffs, and take you in front of Mearls to be beaten with a disenchanter's snout or what -- but it seems pretty clear that these things ARE a violation.
They can kick you out of the playtest, but they can do that for any reason, including not liking your face.
They could also sue you for breach of contract. My understanding, which may be wrong, is that breach of contract in the absence of a penalty clause generally only recovers actual damages (including, e.g., damage to Wizards of the Coast's reputation), and punitive damages only kick in if you're deemed to have breached it maliciously. Maybe I'm wrong, but if I were a juror, you'd have a hard time convincing me that actual damage for you playing over the Internet amounts to much. I'm also not convinced the agreement prohibits playing over the Internet despite the FAQ's claims otherwise. But it wouldn't really be worth going to court to test it.
If you reproduce a portion of the materials that is too large to be fair use, they could sue you for copyright infringement, which can include substantial statutory damages.
Of course, most likely, if they found you've violated the agreement, they would first send you a letter demanding you take it down (or send a DMCA notice to the website demanding they take it down). They would probably only sue if you persisted.