Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jack Daniel" data-source="post: 3792858" data-attributes="member: 694">I have a vested interest in the legal questions brought up by this issue, since I'm getting ready to publish my first couple of modules (for Labyrinth Lord, not OSRIC, but the issues are the same).I find the Napster analogy brought up earlier to be both fallacious and misleading.  It's far more accurate to say that old-school analogue systems are rather a lot more like video game emulators.You cannot copyright algorithms (the very definition of what an algorithm is makes such an idea nonsensical), and algorithms form the foundations of all software (to say nothing of game rules -- you can't copyright the underlying processes themselves, even if you can trademark the name and presentation).  This is why console emulators, so long as they are not distributed with any required BIOS roms, are not illegal of and in themselves.  Only copyrighted rom images (including both games whatever OS software might be required to operate the emulator) are illegal.  This hasn't stopped clever programmers from creating emulation software (and even "cloned" hardware), and from writing entirely new roms that contain no copyrighted IP and can thus be played on emulators, or even dumped to carts or burned to CDs, without any legal issues whatsoever.  Newly invented roms are never illegal; but distributing a copyrighted BIOS rom needed to run a program that emulates a console most certainly is.The upshot of this?  If I were to scan and sell (illegally) copies of the 1e Player's Handbook and modules U1 and Q1, that would be tantamount to selling illegally cloned consoles (with BIOS roms included) and also selling illegal copies of Mario Bros. and the Legend of Zelda.  (In point of fact the 8-bit NES is one of those systems that does not need a BIOS rom, and so a n NES emulator is legal -- but a Mario or Zelda rom image is still quite illegal.)  If I were to write my own AD&D 1e compatible module, and release it in 100% compliance with the OGL (whether I mention its OSRIC compatibility or not), that's the same as if I were to program my own 8-bit platform or adventure game that just happened to come in a format that could be run on an NES emulator.  So the question is, are books like OSRIC and Labyrinth Lord more like NES and Atari 2600 emulators, or more like, say, Atari 5200 and PSX emulators?  That is, do they contain only algorithms, or do they contain both algorithms and IP (in the way that the later sort of emulators contain both alorightms and copyrighted BIOS roms when operational)?  I would have to answer that OSRIC and other such games are indisputably more like the former, especially when they themselves have been created under the terms of the OGL.  What IP is there for WotC to sue over?  Name and presentation?  The phrase "Dungeons & Dragons" is never mentioned, and you can't copyright the idea of an RPG (or else there never would've been "Tunnels & Trolls").   Elves, dwarves, and halflings?  I think the Tolkien estate might have a better chance of winning that suit.  Magic Missile?  Clerics and Paladins?  Experience levels?  Those things are either in the SRD or allowed under the broader OGL.  No, folks, I think the old-school retro-clones are quite safe from a legal standpoint.  Although it certainly doesn't hurt that at the moment, we're still too unimportant for WotC to bother with.</blockquote>

Verification