The Sigil
Mr. 3000 (Words per post)
Simple...
Standard Disclaimer: IANAL
As far as I can tell, however, there are basically three ways to go about publishing something these days. I will go from MOST restrictive to LEAST restrictive, and attempt to explain, to the best of my understanding, what you can and can't do.
MOST RESTRICTIVE: Publishing under the d20STL.
If you publish a "d20 work" - which basically means, if you use the d20 logo to identify your work as "d20 compatible" (displaying the logo in a paper discussing the merits and deficiencies of corporate logos is another story), you MUST publish under the d20STL.
PLUSSES: Your work is identifiable as compatible with D&D and other d20 Games. You are allowed to use the same material as in the Open Game License unless that material falls into one of the restricted areas below. Your work should be protected by the WotC legal department if someone else uses it wrongly. You are protected from the WotC legal department if you are in compliance (they can't touch you).
MINUSES: If you AREN'T in compliance, WotC's legal department has a pretty easy case against you. Note that there are more things to comply with than just publishing under the "vanilla" OGL.
RESTRICTIONS:
1.) You must publish under the OGL, so all of the limitations described for OGL below also apply to you.
2.) You may not include an explanation of how to create or level up a character.
3.) You may not alter the definitions of certain defined terms.
4.) At least 5% of your work must be released as Open Game Content (note that this need not be original OGC).
5.) If WotC subsequently elects to change the license (and they have done so a couple of times), you must make sure you remain in compliance. This is a biggie on websites, because it means that just because you were in compliance a month ago, that doesn't mean you are in compliance now. Since you are considered to be "publishing" your website every time someone loads it, you must update your site - and all material on it - every time the license changes. IOW, with a website you must check all past and future material for compliance with each license change and make the change within 30 days of the license change (yuk). This is not quite as big a problem for hardcopy publishers, who do not have to recall previous print runs if the license changes (AFAIK) but must make sure that future print runs are in compliance with the new license.
Obviously, the nasties here are points 1 and 5. If you're in compliance with point 1, it's not much of a jump to get in compliance with points 2-4.
==========
MIDDLINGLY RESTRICTIVE: Open Gaming License
PLUSSES: You can use Open Game Content from other sources in your work. Your work should be protected by the WotC legal department if someone else uses it wrongly. You are protected from the WotC legal department if you are in compliance (they can't touch you).
MINUSES: If you AREN'T in compliance, WotC's legal department has a pretty easy case against you.
RESTRICTIONS:
1.) You may not use anyone's copyrighted work or trademarked material without their written permission (if it is Open Game Content they have explicitly granted permission) - specifically, you cannot indicate compatibility with a system unless you receive written permission.
2.) You must clearly designate what portions of your work are Open Game Content (note that unlike the d20STL, you could conceivably publish a 0% OGC work, though why you would want to do so is beyond me). Note that Open Game Content that you "borrow" from others must stay Open - you cannot choose to "close" it in your book. Note that to declare something as Open Game Content, you must have the right to do so (either you created it or you must get written permission from the person who did). Note also that section 1d sets a "minimum" of what constitutes Open Game Content; all "Rules" you create are automatically Open Game Content and you can add more to it by designating it as open, but you cannot do less (i.e., you cannot "close" rules).
3.) You must update Section 15 of the Open Game License by adding ALL of the entries from the Section 15 of EVERY other OGL publication you use (for instance, if you use 5 sources, each of which credits the System Reference Document, you need not list the System Reference Document 5 times).
4.) You must include the OGL with your document.
5.) You cannot limit the use of OGC in any way not proscribed in the OGL (IOW, you can't say "this is Open, but you have to print it in blue ink or it's not Open").
NOTE: Unlike the d20STL, publishing under the OGL does NOT require you to "stay current." You may publish under any "approved" version of the OGL you wish (most publications use 1.0 or 1.0a) even if they release a new one. IOW, WotC can't "take back" the OGL or anything that has been released as OGC. So it's a "publish and forget" situation - if you're in compliance when you publish, you're in compliance forever, even if WotC subsequently releases another version of the license.
That's it. Really. #4 is laughably easy. #1 is fairly straightforward. #5 is not a particular favorite of those who like to protect their "intellectual property" with hyper-restrictive licensing agreements (Larry Elmore's art collection, for instance, is WAY out of compliance on point 5 because he tries to put restrictions on the OGC - such as "you must include my logo with the graphic" - unfortunately, by releasing it as OGC, you can't do that - you can only say, "you must publish under the OGL" - and people can cut his logo from the graphic if they want to and he has no legal recourse) but isn't too hard to complain about (just limit your OGC designations). #3 is sometimes a pain (especially with older products that don't have their Section 15 in order) but nothing a quick e-mail to the publisher won't usually solve - this is also the most commonly "goofed" section as far as compliance. #2 is the one that most companies fail to comply with by not *clearly* designating stuff as Open Game Content.
("Clearly" seems to be a muddy legal term, and I submit that 75% of companies at a minimum - and probably more - are NOT clear in their designation, despite their howls to the contrary - I personally prefer to go by the "give a six-year-old a highlighter" rule - a normal six-year-old with a highlighter should be able to read the "designation of Open Content" once and then go through a book and highlight all of the OGC - and nothing that is not OGC - on the first try. A lot of companies say, "it is clear in the designation, but it will take a lot of work and thinking on the end-user's part for the end-user to dig it out - we are under no obligation to make it easy to dig out" - to which I say, "by my understanding, that is NOT 'clear'" - but this is another rant entirely. Another rant is "cripple-OGC" - such as designating everything about a Monster or Spell as OGC except the name - bah - how is anyone going to use it?)
==========
LEAST RESTRICTIVE: Fan Site
PLUSSES: You don't have to worry about complying with all of the terms above and understanding legalese.
MINUSES: You have to rely on the "fair use" defense. The WotC legal department CAN try to shut you down (which is NOT possible - and they won't bother doing - if you have published under the OGL and are in compliance with it).
RESTRICTIONS:
1.) You had better not slap a d20 Logo on your site.
2.) Your collection of material should not be in obvious copyright violation. Posting a single Feat from a non-OGC source (e.g., Tome and Blood) that your character has on the same page as your character you can probably get away with. Referencing a page in a non-OGC work, or starting a fan site using some of the names of places and gods from the Scarred Lands you can probably get away with. Posting chapters from Tome and Blood or posting the chapter on the Titanswar in the Scarred lands is likely to get you into trouble. Posting a quote of a sentence or two is not.
==========
COMMON MISCONCEPTIONS:
1.) "If I use OGC, I have to publish under the OGL." IANAL, but AFAIK, the Open Game License does NOT trump copyright and fair use laws. One of the provisions of the OGL is that by using/publishing anything that OGC, you must accept the terms of the OGL. That is, I believe, a misleading statement of dubious legality (at best). You could enter into a separate written agreement with a company to use their OGC (though it would have to be only their original OGC and not someone else's OGC). You should also be able to use "fair use" doctrine to pull small quotes - even if they are OGC. Using the OGL is the EASIEST way to be safe, but not the ONLY way.
2.) "I have to ask permission to use someone's OGC if I use the OGL." You don't. It is considered good ettiquette to do so if you intend to publish something for profit (and I recommend sending a complimentary copy of your product) but not mandatory. They gave you written permisssion when they used the OGL in the first place.
3.) "This post is completely correct." As I have said, IANAL. However, these guidelines seem to encompass the main points that you need to know to stay out of trouble. As a final note, one of the benefits of publishing under the OGL comes in Section 13 - if you make a mistake and are "in breach" of the license, you have 30 days to fix your mistake from the time you are notified. Now, this doesn't mean "go publish stuff that you know is not OGC for 30 days before yanking it off the net to avoid court" - that probably won't hold water anyway because your use was not in "good faith" - but it does mean that if you do make a little mistake, no big deal - you have time to fix it. It's a "nice-guy" clause in the OGL.
==========
Again, this is not a be-all end-all FAQ, and may not even be 100% legally correct (IANAL) but AFAIK, it's a pretty solid set of guidelines to help keep you on the right track.
--The Sigil
Standard Disclaimer: IANAL
As far as I can tell, however, there are basically three ways to go about publishing something these days. I will go from MOST restrictive to LEAST restrictive, and attempt to explain, to the best of my understanding, what you can and can't do.
MOST RESTRICTIVE: Publishing under the d20STL.
If you publish a "d20 work" - which basically means, if you use the d20 logo to identify your work as "d20 compatible" (displaying the logo in a paper discussing the merits and deficiencies of corporate logos is another story), you MUST publish under the d20STL.
PLUSSES: Your work is identifiable as compatible with D&D and other d20 Games. You are allowed to use the same material as in the Open Game License unless that material falls into one of the restricted areas below. Your work should be protected by the WotC legal department if someone else uses it wrongly. You are protected from the WotC legal department if you are in compliance (they can't touch you).
MINUSES: If you AREN'T in compliance, WotC's legal department has a pretty easy case against you. Note that there are more things to comply with than just publishing under the "vanilla" OGL.
RESTRICTIONS:
1.) You must publish under the OGL, so all of the limitations described for OGL below also apply to you.
2.) You may not include an explanation of how to create or level up a character.
3.) You may not alter the definitions of certain defined terms.
4.) At least 5% of your work must be released as Open Game Content (note that this need not be original OGC).
5.) If WotC subsequently elects to change the license (and they have done so a couple of times), you must make sure you remain in compliance. This is a biggie on websites, because it means that just because you were in compliance a month ago, that doesn't mean you are in compliance now. Since you are considered to be "publishing" your website every time someone loads it, you must update your site - and all material on it - every time the license changes. IOW, with a website you must check all past and future material for compliance with each license change and make the change within 30 days of the license change (yuk). This is not quite as big a problem for hardcopy publishers, who do not have to recall previous print runs if the license changes (AFAIK) but must make sure that future print runs are in compliance with the new license.
Obviously, the nasties here are points 1 and 5. If you're in compliance with point 1, it's not much of a jump to get in compliance with points 2-4.
==========
MIDDLINGLY RESTRICTIVE: Open Gaming License
PLUSSES: You can use Open Game Content from other sources in your work. Your work should be protected by the WotC legal department if someone else uses it wrongly. You are protected from the WotC legal department if you are in compliance (they can't touch you).
MINUSES: If you AREN'T in compliance, WotC's legal department has a pretty easy case against you.
RESTRICTIONS:
1.) You may not use anyone's copyrighted work or trademarked material without their written permission (if it is Open Game Content they have explicitly granted permission) - specifically, you cannot indicate compatibility with a system unless you receive written permission.
2.) You must clearly designate what portions of your work are Open Game Content (note that unlike the d20STL, you could conceivably publish a 0% OGC work, though why you would want to do so is beyond me). Note that Open Game Content that you "borrow" from others must stay Open - you cannot choose to "close" it in your book. Note that to declare something as Open Game Content, you must have the right to do so (either you created it or you must get written permission from the person who did). Note also that section 1d sets a "minimum" of what constitutes Open Game Content; all "Rules" you create are automatically Open Game Content and you can add more to it by designating it as open, but you cannot do less (i.e., you cannot "close" rules).
3.) You must update Section 15 of the Open Game License by adding ALL of the entries from the Section 15 of EVERY other OGL publication you use (for instance, if you use 5 sources, each of which credits the System Reference Document, you need not list the System Reference Document 5 times).
4.) You must include the OGL with your document.
5.) You cannot limit the use of OGC in any way not proscribed in the OGL (IOW, you can't say "this is Open, but you have to print it in blue ink or it's not Open").
NOTE: Unlike the d20STL, publishing under the OGL does NOT require you to "stay current." You may publish under any "approved" version of the OGL you wish (most publications use 1.0 or 1.0a) even if they release a new one. IOW, WotC can't "take back" the OGL or anything that has been released as OGC. So it's a "publish and forget" situation - if you're in compliance when you publish, you're in compliance forever, even if WotC subsequently releases another version of the license.
That's it. Really. #4 is laughably easy. #1 is fairly straightforward. #5 is not a particular favorite of those who like to protect their "intellectual property" with hyper-restrictive licensing agreements (Larry Elmore's art collection, for instance, is WAY out of compliance on point 5 because he tries to put restrictions on the OGC - such as "you must include my logo with the graphic" - unfortunately, by releasing it as OGC, you can't do that - you can only say, "you must publish under the OGL" - and people can cut his logo from the graphic if they want to and he has no legal recourse) but isn't too hard to complain about (just limit your OGC designations). #3 is sometimes a pain (especially with older products that don't have their Section 15 in order) but nothing a quick e-mail to the publisher won't usually solve - this is also the most commonly "goofed" section as far as compliance. #2 is the one that most companies fail to comply with by not *clearly* designating stuff as Open Game Content.
("Clearly" seems to be a muddy legal term, and I submit that 75% of companies at a minimum - and probably more - are NOT clear in their designation, despite their howls to the contrary - I personally prefer to go by the "give a six-year-old a highlighter" rule - a normal six-year-old with a highlighter should be able to read the "designation of Open Content" once and then go through a book and highlight all of the OGC - and nothing that is not OGC - on the first try. A lot of companies say, "it is clear in the designation, but it will take a lot of work and thinking on the end-user's part for the end-user to dig it out - we are under no obligation to make it easy to dig out" - to which I say, "by my understanding, that is NOT 'clear'" - but this is another rant entirely. Another rant is "cripple-OGC" - such as designating everything about a Monster or Spell as OGC except the name - bah - how is anyone going to use it?)
==========
LEAST RESTRICTIVE: Fan Site
PLUSSES: You don't have to worry about complying with all of the terms above and understanding legalese.
MINUSES: You have to rely on the "fair use" defense. The WotC legal department CAN try to shut you down (which is NOT possible - and they won't bother doing - if you have published under the OGL and are in compliance with it).
RESTRICTIONS:
1.) You had better not slap a d20 Logo on your site.
2.) Your collection of material should not be in obvious copyright violation. Posting a single Feat from a non-OGC source (e.g., Tome and Blood) that your character has on the same page as your character you can probably get away with. Referencing a page in a non-OGC work, or starting a fan site using some of the names of places and gods from the Scarred Lands you can probably get away with. Posting chapters from Tome and Blood or posting the chapter on the Titanswar in the Scarred lands is likely to get you into trouble. Posting a quote of a sentence or two is not.
==========
COMMON MISCONCEPTIONS:
1.) "If I use OGC, I have to publish under the OGL." IANAL, but AFAIK, the Open Game License does NOT trump copyright and fair use laws. One of the provisions of the OGL is that by using/publishing anything that OGC, you must accept the terms of the OGL. That is, I believe, a misleading statement of dubious legality (at best). You could enter into a separate written agreement with a company to use their OGC (though it would have to be only their original OGC and not someone else's OGC). You should also be able to use "fair use" doctrine to pull small quotes - even if they are OGC. Using the OGL is the EASIEST way to be safe, but not the ONLY way.
2.) "I have to ask permission to use someone's OGC if I use the OGL." You don't. It is considered good ettiquette to do so if you intend to publish something for profit (and I recommend sending a complimentary copy of your product) but not mandatory. They gave you written permisssion when they used the OGL in the first place.
3.) "This post is completely correct." As I have said, IANAL. However, these guidelines seem to encompass the main points that you need to know to stay out of trouble. As a final note, one of the benefits of publishing under the OGL comes in Section 13 - if you make a mistake and are "in breach" of the license, you have 30 days to fix your mistake from the time you are notified. Now, this doesn't mean "go publish stuff that you know is not OGC for 30 days before yanking it off the net to avoid court" - that probably won't hold water anyway because your use was not in "good faith" - but it does mean that if you do make a little mistake, no big deal - you have time to fix it. It's a "nice-guy" clause in the OGL.
==========
Again, this is not a be-all end-all FAQ, and may not even be 100% legally correct (IANAL) but AFAIK, it's a pretty solid set of guidelines to help keep you on the right track.
--The Sigil
Last edited:
