Fan sites to keep the edition alive?

[Garthanos]

Ditto monsters statblocks. There's a reason when Goodman Games released its first 4e adventure the monsters looks different, because it was published before the GSL came into effect.

Now, WotC hasn't come after people making their own powers. And knowing this hasn't stopped me making my own powers. But I know that all could go away the moment someone at WotC changes their policy faster than you can cay "Ema's Character Sheets".

There is a software I have used which allows one to specify ones own style sheets for powers when you export them to html. blink.. I have a different look -- site wide css sheets could be applied according to users tastes. In effect those elements you are identifying as trade dress are made flexible (one of the choices might be totally color flexible so for use purposes the user can see green at-wills and so on) those choices could be saved in a cookie. The default wouldnt need to be very like that WOTC published product but users can experience it identically if they want.

Even language use could with a bit of php be flexible ... The generalized for Powers could be output called well a Feat. In myth and legend all magic spells are pretty much ritualistic and by and large are rarely performed quickly doing so is a stunt or arcane Feat). But by selection or setting a preference the language refers to powers.

I have actually considered what I would do if I put up a site which allowed users to submit there own powers... the main problem is that I wouldnt want to try and police copyright infringement.

 

[S'mon]

I'm likely mangling the law yes, but that's better than just letting people go with their first
instinct

No, I don't think it is better to mislead people rather than remain silent.
If you don't understand the law you should better stick to general comments such as "it's a tricky issue" or "you should check with a lawyer before you do that".

 

[Jester David]

Well I will thank you for making me think about it there are certainly sites which are really falling short with regards to handling trademarks properly and some of them sites I would like to see productive.

Thank you.
It’s mostly about knowledgable risk. You can break all the rules and operate fine - at least currently, as WotC is only actively shutting down sites that copy content. If the sites are fine with the risk & the potential of losing some of their content, then that’s alright.
Sites dedicated to specific campaign settings run the most risk, as they’re using far more trademarked terms, and WotC stopped adding “official fan sites” back in the early days of 3e. The WotC legal team could do horrible things to athas.org or FraternityOfShadows.com.

There is a software I have used which allows one to specify ones own style sheets for powers when you export them to html. blink.. I have a different look -- site wide css sheets could be applied according to users tastes. In effect those elements you are identifying as trade dress are made flexible (one of the choices might be totally color flexible so for use purposes the user can see green at-wills and so on) those choices could be saved in a cookie. The default wouldnt need to be very like that WOTC published product but users can experience it identically if they want.

Even language use could with a bit of php be flexible ... The generalized for Powers could be output called well a Feat. In myth and legend all magic spells are pretty much ritualistic and by and large are rarely performed quickly doing so is a stunt or arcane Feat). But by selection or setting a preference the language refers to powers.

I have actually considered what I would do if I put up a site which allowed users to submit there own powers... the main problem is that I wouldnt want to try and police copyright infringement.

At the very least you should look at what something like YouTube’s Terms and Conditions say about copyright and add a similar disclaimer. And maybe a “report” button to allow people to self-police. When dealing with user submitted content, you should make it easy for copyright holders to report abuse.


But talking to a lawyer is always advisable.

 

[Jester David]

No, I don't think it is better to mislead people rather than remain silent.
If you don't understand the law you should better stick to general comments such as "it's a tricky issue" or "you should check with a lawyer before you do that".

It would be much easier to just say “talk to a lawyer” and wash my hands of the conversation, but almost no one will actually talk to a lawyer. A couple hour consultation with a trademark lawyer will cost a couple hundred dollars. While that is a must-do expense for a serious business, it’s prohibitive for a casual website. A lawyer will run the same cost as three to five years of hosting, if the site isn’t a free blog (such as blogger or wordpress).

I try and limit myself to advising people what they shouldn’t do and directing them to sources of information so they can educate themselves. If I only tell people what they shouldn’t do it it’s less damaging if I’m wrong, as you don’t get C&Ded for not doing something you could have done.

Most errors are pretty common sense. There are a surprising amount of people who don't realize they can't copy images off Google, have no idea what "plagiarism" is, or think that just because a game it no longer being publisher the publisher has abandoned it any anyone can copy or use it now.
If some fansite goes down because someone makes a silly mistake, and I could have prevented it by saying “hey, don’t say ‘dragonborn’, switch it out for ‘dragonman’ or ‘half-dragon’.” then that’s on me as much as the author.

Ideally, WotC would release a plain language fan site policy. A set of guidelines they want us to follow. So we wouldn’t need to pay for a lawyer just to set up a site that makes a few subclasses or monsters. But they haven’t, and the GSL requires a DC 25 Intelligence check to decipher with some subtle limitations (PDFs as the only valid electronic format, and no changing of the rules only additions).

 

[S'mon]

[If some fansite goes down because someone makes a silly mistake, and I could have prevented it by saying “hey, don’t say ‘dragonborn’, switch it out for ‘dragonman’ or ‘half-dragon’.” then that’s on me as much as the author.

But again that's misleading - switching dragonborn for dragonman will make no practical difference, either legally or in terms of WoTC issuing a C&D. They don't issue C&Ds against non-commercial sites for using the word 'dragonborn'. If they issue a C&D IME it's for clear commercial use (and arguable misuse) of their actual registered trade marks such as the Dungeons & Dragons logo, or for copy/pasting of their copyright protected literary and artistic works - their actual text and actual pictures. They didn't sue Goodman Games for having Dragonborn NPCs in their non-GSL 4e adventures. You shouldn't give people the impression that that is the sort of thing to be worrying about.

Edit: Anyway it's not on you, you have no responsibility here.

Edit 2: WotC-Hasbro are actually pretty reasonable with their IP, and IME they only take action in cases where they have a decent claim of infringement and there is some potential harm to them if they don't act. They are no Games Workshop ogre (or old-T$R ogre). Your advice has an unwelcome chilling effect which I don't think WoTC actually want.

 

[Jester David]

They don't issue C&Ds against non-commercial sites for using the word 'dragonborn'. If they issue a C&D IME it's for clear commercial use (and arguable misuse) of their actual registered trade marks such as the Dungeons & Dragons logo, or for copy/pasting of their copyright protected literary and artistic works - their actual text and actual pictures.
You shouldn't give people the impression that that is the sort of thing to be worrying about.

"Don't" is not the same as "can't" or "won't". They might never crack down on non-commercial use. Or their next CEO might have different views on the maintenance of the brand.
And just because a site currently is non-comercial does not mean it will always be non-commercial. If a site becomes popular enough eventually someone might start thinking T-shirts or prints or PDFs. Maybe even a kickstarter.

There's a couple webcomic exmples. Rusty and Co. and Goblins.
The former features a rust monster, which is part of the SRD. But during a Kickstarter to raise money for a book one of the rewards was a stuffy of said rust monster. And the OGL doesn't cover toys, so cue the lawsuit. And another character, a yuan-ti, had to be renamed. The webcomic spent several weeks down and his on-the-ball attorneys managed to settle with WotC before the creator spent years in a painful lawsuit.
With one webcomic drawing attention, the writer of Goblins realized one of his main characters was also yuan-ti, identified as such by name. A monster not part of the SRD. So any books sold of his comics violated the OGL as well. Suddenly he had to go through hundreds of strips looking for examples of the offensive term and editing it out in favour of a game neutral term.

All that could have been avoided with a dash of forethought and a glance at what WotC Product Identity and the OGL.

Anyway it's not on you, you have no responsibility here.

If you can help someone, isn't it?

WotC-Hasbro are actually pretty reasonable with their IP, and IME they only take action in cases where they have a decent claim of infringement and there is some potential harm to them if they don't act. They are no Games Workshop ogre (or old-T$R ogre). Your advice has an unwelcome chilling effect which I don't think WoTC actually want.

WotC is somewhere in the middle, with TSR, Games Workshop, and Palladium on one end and someone like Paizo (or maybe Posthuman Studios) on the other.

WotC isn't too bad but they're not particularly transparent, they tend to talk via legalese, and have a firm policy to send Cease & Desists first and ask questions later. There have been a dozen or so annoying incidents in the past decade from WotC. I know a couple free fan projects in the Dragonlance community got shut down hard by lawyers. And there are other fun incidents like the aforementioned Rusty & Co., Ema's Character Sheets, the Masterplan incident, and more.
It's not worth being afraid of WotC, but it's worth being cautious. Not leaving yourself open in the event of a policy shift or change in management. It's simply a case of being better safe than sorry.

 

[pemerton]

But during a Kickstarter to raise money for a book one of the rewards was a stuffy of said rust monster. And the OGL doesn't cover toys, so cue the lawsuit.

That is not a counterexample to what S'mon said, though - you're talking here about a commercial violation of WotC's IP rights.

And another character, a yuan-ti, had to be renamed.

<snip>

All that could have been avoided with a dash of forethought and a glance at what WotC Product Identity and the OGL.

Yes. WotC have always made it clear that they regard the yuan-ti as highly protected IP: see the definition of Product Identity in the 3.5 SRD, the absence of yuan-ti from the 4e SRD, and the prohibition on publishing derivative artwork of yuan-ti in clause 5.7 of the GSL.

So any books sold of his comics violated the OGL as well.

<snip>

It's not worth being afraid of WotC, but it's worth being cautious. Not leaving yourself open in the event of a policy shift or change in management. It's simply a case of being better safe than sorry.

S'mon referred to non-commercial sites. You're talking here about someone selling books. Just as with the raising of money via kickstarter, that's commercial violation of WotC's IP rights, and people who do that sort of thing (i) are taking their chances, and (ii) would be crazy to rely on opinions from a fan forum to ascertain their legal position, especially in as litigious a society as the US.

 

[pemerton]

If you don't understand IP law you should not comment on it IMO.

Good advice, which I try to comply with by a combination of (i) not saying too much and (ii) doing my best to understand what I do say!

 

[S'mon]

That is not a counterexample to what S'mon said, though - you're talking here about a commercial violation of WotC's IP rights.

A plush toy rust monster is a clear violation of the OGL, yes. If you want to sell plush toys, don't call them rust monsters, don't use the OGL. eg Reaper sells an 'oxidation beast' miniature which can be used as a rust monster.

WoTC will enforce the OGL against clear breaches, and will take action vs commercial use of their trade marks (only commercial use of a mark can infringe, although in the US 'commercial' is sometimes pushed beyond the Lanham Act definition IMO). But you can use a WoTC mark descriptively if you make clear that you are not WoTC. Kevin Simbieda might not like it, but yes you can publish material compatible with various RPGs, and indicate as much, and not infringe the TMs of those RPGs - UNLESS you are using the OGL, which bans this.

 

[S'mon]

There's a couple webcomic exmples. Rusty and Co. and Goblins.
The former features a rust monster, which is part of the SRD. But during a Kickstarter to raise money for a book one of the rewards was a stuffy of said rust monster. And the OGL doesn't cover toys, so cue the lawsuit. And another character, a yuan-ti, had to be renamed. The webcomic spent several weeks down and his on-the-ball attorneys managed to settle with WotC before the creator spent years in a painful lawsuit.

Surely WoTC just issued a breach-of-OGL notice, as required by the OGL, the target complied, and once they had complied their site could go up again. AIR by their own OGL license WotC can't sue you if
you comply with their notification order in the grace period. This was pointed out to me many
years ago by OGL users as one of the main benefits of the OGL. It means you should be able to use it without needing a lawyer.