D&D 5E Is this guy legally publishing 5e stuff?

was · Feb 27, 2015

One of the biggest problems that I can see, is that two of his products are entitled "DnD 5th Ed Beginning Adventure Pack" and "DnD 5th Ed Adventure Pack". That's taking it a bit farther than simply stating it's 5th ed. compatible. Those titles have copyright / trademark violation written all over them, if he didn't get any kind of permission first.

http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/produ...ginning-Adventure-Pack-for-1st--2nd-Level-PCs
http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/produ...r-2nd3rd-Level-PCs-start-of-the-Red-Blade-War

delericho · Feb 27, 2015

Dragonblade said:
Mentioning it? No. But indicating compatibility with "Dungeons and Dragons" by name as opposed to the generic "Fifth edition of the world's more popular RPG" is a straight up violation of the OGL. Not including a copy of the OGL with his materials is also a violation. With the OGL revoked due to his violation(s), he cannot use any of the copyrighted rules text included in the SRD which is what all d20 products must use, including Pathfinder.

You don't need to use the OGL to produce products, or indeed to produce compatible products. It's just that doing so gives a nice firm foundation on which to build, and not doing so means you have to take more care in your handling of copyrights/trademarks/patents. (Using the OGL doesn't mean you don't need to worry about such things, of course, it's just that it makes a lot of stuff a lot clearer.)

Of course, that's the general case. It doesn't necessarily apply to this guy, because...

Likewise, all of the classic D&D art images he is using are copyrighted, which means he can't legally use those either without permission from the copyright holder.

He is a C&D/lawsuit waiting to happen.

Agreed.

Primal · Feb 27, 2015

I don't recognise that Belisle cover art piece (Red Blades Diplomacy), but it features the holy symbol of Abadar, which means it is copyrighted by Paizo. Wow...

BoldItalic · Feb 27, 2015

As well as drawing it to the attention of possible copyright holders, it might be worth drawing it to the attention of DriveThru, since they are selling it. I don't know what their T&Cs say, but it probably includes something about copyright on the products you upload for them to sell.

mach1.9pants · Feb 27, 2015

I sent an email to RPGNow customer service. That is clear trade mark violation, and drivethrurpg etc is probably just as liable (IANAL) as he is by listing that stuff as being D&D adventures.

Evenglare · Feb 27, 2015

[MENTION=6779742]Jargogle[/MENTION]
If what you say about pushing his product out as an official license then I am inclined to believer.
Still to the poitn though, wizards needs to get off their asses and put out a comunity use contract or something. Im sure this could have avoided if we know who exactly what is and isn't legal.

Morrus · Feb 27, 2015

You can't violate a license you're not using. The OGL doesn't come into it.

You can indicate compatibility. Next time you're in an electronics store, look at all the third party iPhone chargers, cases, etc. Those aren't licensed.

Not having seen the actual products, I've no idea whether what he's doing is OK. It can be done, but you need to know what you're doing.

Someone mentioned he's using WotC's art? That'll be enough on its own.

delericho · Feb 27, 2015

Evenglare said:
Still to the poitn though, wizards needs to get off their asses and put out a comunity use contract or something. Im sure this could have avoided if we know who exactly what is and isn't legal.

The thing is, we do. It's just not the answer many of us would prefer.

WotC would prefer that people wait before publishing material. That may not be a popular position, but that's their position - and it's their prerogative.

For people who refuse to wait (for whatever reason), there are two other options: either publish without a license at all, which means being subject to standard IP law (which is complex, but not entirely unknowable); or publish under the SRD and work around the holes in the 3e SRD. Both are suboptimal, but there are nonetheless two legal routes to market if you're determined.

Morrus · Feb 27, 2015

mach1.9pants said:
I sent an email to RPGNow customer service. That is clear trade mark violation, and drivethrurpg etc is probably just as liable (IANAL) as he is by listing that stuff as being D&D adventures.

I can tell you in advance what they'll say, since I asked Steve Wieck this same thing last year:

http://www.enworld.org/forum/content.php?1847-D-D-5th-Edition-Release-Schedules

(scroll down to the third party part)

Mark CMG · Feb 27, 2015

Interesting. Seems he believes his stuff is all above board, including the first thing he Kickstarter "Dungeons and Dragons player/DM online tool site"

https://www.kickstarter.com/profile/1000694697/created

He's managed to come on the scene rather swiftly, just the last few months, fund three small Kickstarters and in the last month put over a dozen PDF products on RPGNow/DTRPG/OBS. The artwork appears to be top notch stuff but his main gig, he seems to say in his first KS, is computer programming, so he updates his website with his progress on the online tools here -

http://danhass.biz/

I wonder why more people aren't directly claiming compatibility with 5E, using top notch artwork, and successfully funding three KSs in a few months (soon to be four)?

Is the image that shows up before you run the first KS video an Elmore piece?

D&D 5E Is this guy legally publishing 5e stuff?

was

Adventurer

delericho

Legend

Primal

First Post

BoldItalic

First Post

mach1.9pants

Hero

Evenglare

Adventurer

Morrus

Well, that was fun

delericho

Legend

Morrus

Well, that was fun

Mark CMG

Creative Mountain Games

Attachments

Similar Threads