Alright, so level with me...

[Remathilis]

Goodman Games did these GSL-less products in 2008-2009 while the GSL was still in limbo. They changed over to GSL when it was finalized.

That said, They did it using the OGL and SRD, just changing the math to reflect 4e's math and not explaining the change. For example, a Goblin might have a +1 reflex in the SRD, but his Reflex "save" was printed as 13 in the 4e-compatible modules.

That said, If I was designing a GSL-less OGL module, I'd do the following.

1.) Avoid ANYTHING mentioned in the PHB and assume your audience knows how to play and use the basic rules.
2.) Use only things discussed in the SRD. You can do dwarves, elves, even tieflings, but dragonborn and warlords are a no-no.*
3.) Monsters cannot be reprinted "as is". You can't use a Goblin Cutter from the Monster Manual, but you could make a Goblin Slicer with similar (tweaked) math.
4.) Believe it or not, Pathfinder could be your friend for expanding the SRD out. Not sure how it would work with the PF licence.

*You can use Dwarf, Elf, Gnome, Halfling, Half-elf, Human, Half-orc, and Tiefling no problems. Eladrins (as monsters) don't appear in the SRD as monsters, but are referenced in the Summon Monsters summon list, so use as your own risk. Dragonborn is out, but I think there was a copyright challenge to it so I dunno. The 11 PHB classes, + Invoker (pulled from wizard) and Psion is open. You MIGHT be able to use Warlord, Warlock, Shaman, and Avenger due to common use of these words, but I'd be really careful with them.

IANAL, btw.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I'm actually thinking of two things.

1: A crowdfunded (and crowd-sourced) Unearthed Arcana type book of houserules and commentaries on how to run the game. Discussions of pacing, skill challenges, and the like - without actually including the original rules. Publishing handled at Lulu because of shipping.

2: A reverse engineering of 4e using a mix of the 3.5 SRD and the Archmage Engine (the 13th Age engine whenever it turns up). Admittedly replacing terms like "Healing Surges" with "Recoveries" because that's what Archmage calls them. But getting the math to all match up. Again possibly crowdfunded for content and ending up at Lulu.

 

[Jester David]

I'm actually thinking of two things.

1: A crowdfunded (and crowd-sourced) Unearthed Arcana type book of houserules and commentaries on how to run the game. Discussions of pacing, skill challenges, and the like - without actually including the original rules. Publishing handled at Lulu because of shipping..

Keep in mind the GSL explicitly does not allow alternate rules or changing the rules. You can add rules but not change them, or alter the flavour of races and classes.
This is likely why no one else has done it.

Given 4e is deadish WotC might be more forgiving and willing to ignore. But it might be easier to work around the GSL by sticking to what is allowed by copyright.

As mentioned in this thread, the initial few Goodman Games 4e products did now follow the GSL. So these might be a good guide to what is permissible.

 

[pemerton]

Keep in mind the GSL explicitly does not allow alternate rules or changing the rules. You can add rules but not change them, or alter the flavour of races and classes.

<snip>

But it might be easier to work around the GSL by sticking to what is allowed by copyright.

I assume that Neonchameleon is not intending to use the GSL. As I posted upthread, the GSL is mostly a trademark licence and I don't think Neonchameleon is wanting to use WotC's trademarks.

I'm actually thinking of two things.

1: A crowdfunded (and crowd-sourced) Unearthed Arcana type book of houserules and commentaries on how to run the game. Discussions of pacing, skill challenges, and the like - without actually including the original rules. Publishing handled at Lulu because of shipping.

2: A reverse engineering of 4e using a mix of the 3.5 SRD and the Archmage Engine (the 13th Age engine whenever it turns up). Admittedly replacing terms like "Healing Surges" with "Recoveries" because that's what Archmage calls them. But getting the math to all match up. Again possibly crowdfunded for content and ending up at Lulu.

For both things, especially as money is involved (and contracts with the funding crowd, presumably) I would be getting some sort of legal advice. I hear you know a good contract and IP lawyer, but I don't know if he gives advice or not!

My brief take, for what it's worth:

(1) I don't see any major issues with respect to this. You are not reproducing any WotC copyrighted text. You are not using their trademarks, presumably - which might cause you some issue around title and promotion, but presumably you have some ideas about how to work around that, OSRIC-style.

(2) I would see potentially greater issues with this. I don't know how the Archmage Engine will be related to the 3E and/or 3.5 SRD, but Pelgrane Press can't license you to reproduce text copyrighted by OGL unless that text is also OGL - in which case WotC already offered you the license when they released the SRDs under the OGL.

I've discussed an issue related to this with [MENTION=463]S'mon[/MENTION] in the past, in relation to OSRIC. OSRIC makes my antennae go up, but S'mon's antennae are more reliable than mine and I think he thinks OSRIC is probably OK. The bits in OSRIC that stand out the most to me are the reproductions, in the monster section, of the racial numbers appearing, disposition of forces, etc, which is getting close (in my mind) to reproducing WotC's copyright fiction. Presumably you would be reproducing mechanics rather than fiction, and so would be further over on the safe side of the line.

In the end, I'm not an IP lawyer and these are just intuitions. You need proper advice.

 

[S'mon]

... I hear you know a good contract and IP lawyer, but I don't know if he gives advice or not!...

I've discussed an issue related to this with [MENTION=463]S'mon[/MENTION] in the past, in relation to OSRIC. OSRIC makes my antennae go up, but S'mon's antennae are more reliable than mine and I think he thinks OSRIC is probably OK. The bits in OSRIC that stand out the most to me are the reproductions, in the monster section, of the racial numbers appearing, disposition of forces, etc, which is getting close (in my mind) to reproducing WotC's copyright fiction. Presumably you would be reproducing mechanics rather than fiction, and so would be further over on the safe side of the line.

Hi, I'm S'mon, you may remember me from such posts as...
My academia.edu profile

FWIW I've considered your argument pemerton and I now think there's a 50-60% chance that if WoTC took Stuart Marshall to the UK High Court, after all the arguments and explanations around the OGL the judge would find there was a technical copyright in those monster stat blocks that seem to derive more from the 1e Monster Manual than the OGL. It's not more than 60% because there's a good chance the judge would say the copying was not substantive or that what was taken was not protectable. However it looks like a really de minimis infringement; worst case scenario for Marshall then would be nominal damages, having to remove/edit the stat blocks, and having to pay his own costs - but he's a clever fellow and before he published OSRIC he got an English law firm to represent him on no-win no-fee. So WoTC would spend a bunch of money to little benefit if they won, and terrible if they lost ("Your monster stat blocks don't meet the EU's own-original-creation standard for literary copyright" or somesuch - unlikely, but could happen). This is the reason OSRIC was published by an English publisher, the Manichean US Law approach to IP and other civil rights makes defending a claim much riskier.

 

[pemerton]

Hi, I'm S'mon, you may remember me from such posts as

I remember you from many posts!

Am I right in thinking that OSRIC has not been published for profit? If I'm correct about that, am I further correct in thinking that that goes (at least in part) to the measure of the remedy for any breach?

Whereas [MENTION=87792]Neonchameleon[/MENTION] is talking about crowdfunding - which, if my above two suppositions are correct, I further suppose might potentially make a difference.

Any thoughts?

 

[S'mon]

I remember you from many posts!

Am I right in thinking that OSRIC has not been published for profit? If I'm correct about that, am I further correct in thinking that that goes (at least in part) to the measure of the remedy for any breach?

Whereas [MENTION=87792]Neonchameleon[/MENTION] is talking about crowdfunding - which, if my above two suppositions are correct, I further suppose might potentially make a difference.

Any thoughts?

Damages in UK law for IP infringement would typically either be assessed on loss-caused or account-of-profits; the latter is common for commercial piracy. On the OSRIC case I don't think WotC could show that copying the number-appearing number for gnolls etc from the 1e MM caused them any loss.

Winning a claim vs an OGL 4e retro-clone would depend on the facts - what was copied, eg was anything copied that was both copyright-protectable and not in the OGL SRD. If you just copy/pasted the 4e PHB and sold it, that looks like clear copyright infringement where an account of profits & costs awarded would be likely.

 

[darjr]

http://www.livingforgottenrealms.com/

Living Forgotten Realms recently released a slew of adventures written for Origins and one of their EPIC level 28 campaign adventures.

 

[Jester David]

I assume that Neonchameleon is not intending to use the GSL. As I posted upthread, the GSL is mostly a trademark licence and I don't think Neonchameleon is wanting to use WotC's trademarks.

It's also the trade dress, such as the formatting of the monster statblocks, format and layout of power statblocks, use of icons, and even use of the term "Dungeons & Dragons".
It's going to be hard to advertise a book as compatible with 4e without using the term D&D.

 

[Dias Ex Machina]

Dias ex machina is also still making products, actually their product APEX is releasing tomorrow, its a modern superhero rules for 4e.

Thanks for the plug!