Black Flag Black Flag Reference Document released by Kobold Press.

[see]

As a high-level overview (not legal advice for whatever jurisdiction you're in) CC-BY only really requires credit and link. If you release something as CC-BY, I can release my adaptation of that material without putting my adaptation under CC-BY, and I don't need to mark what material in my release was released by you and what is original to me (though I do need to mention that I did modifications). The license forbids me from trying to stop a third party from using your material under CC-BY, but I don't have to particularly facilitate it, either.

In general (though there are some possible corner cases), this means that if I adapt material released under CC-BY, I can release my adaptation under the OGL 1.0a, the ORC, any of the other CC licenses (jncluding -NC, -SA, and -ND varieties), or a wide variety of other licenses.

Looking at the Black Flag SRD, they did what looks to me (in my layman understanding) as the correct CC-BY attribution and link; someone who wants to find out what they can use under CC-BY should follow that link in the PDF. If someone uses something directly from the Black Flag SRD (instead of going back to the WotC SRD with the provided link), they should use ORC.

 

[Parmandur]

Wizards could always release the 5.Xe SRD under the ORC license...

They could, but there are potential issues with the share-aloke functionality of ORC. CC is cleaner, doubt they will eease under a more restrictive license.

 

[Cadence]

As a high-level overview (not legal advice for whatever jurisdiction you're in) CC-BY only really requires credit and link. If you release something as CC-BY, I can release my adaptation of that material without putting my adaptation under CC-BY, and I don't need to mark what material in my release was released by you and what is original to me (though I do need to mention that I did modifications). The license forbids me from trying to stop a third party from using your material under CC-BY, but I don't have to particularly facilitate it, either.

In general (though there are some possible corner cases), this means that if I adapt material released under CC-BY, I can release my adaptation under the OGL 1.0a, the ORC, any of the other CC licenses (jncluding -NC, -SA, and -ND varieties), or a wide variety of other licenses.

Looking at the Black Flag SRD, they did what looks to me (in my layman understanding) as the correct CC-BY attribution and link; someone who wants to find out what they can use under CC-BY should follow that link in the PDF. If someone uses something directly from the Black Flag SRD (instead of going back to the WotC SRD with the provided link), they should use ORC.

Does anyone going from the Black Flag SRD using ORC also need to give attribution to the 5.0 SRD too to honor the original CC-BY on that material? (It kind of feels like they should?)

 

[M_Natas]

As a high-level overview (not legal advice for whatever jurisdiction you're in) CC-BY only really requires credit and link. If you release something as CC-BY, I can release my adaptation of that material without putting my adaptation under CC-BY, and I don't need to mark what material in my release was released by you and what is original to me (though I do need to mention that I did modifications). The license forbids me from trying to stop a third party from using your material under CC-BY, but I don't have to particularly facilitate it, either.

In general (though there are some possible corner cases), this means that if I adapt material released under CC-BY, I can release my adaptation under the OGL 1.0a, the ORC, any of the other CC licenses (jncluding -NC, -SA, and -ND varieties), or a wide variety of other licenses.

Looking at the Black Flag SRD, they did what looks to me (in my layman understanding) as the correct CC-BY attribution and link; someone who wants to find out what they can use under CC-BY should follow that link in the PDF. If someone uses something directly from the Black Flag SRD (instead of going back to the WotC SRD with the provided link), they should use ORC.

But if somebody uses the Black Flag SRD, they also need to attribute WotC according to CC BY Rules of their SRD because the Black Flag SRD uses parts of it, so all future products based on the Black Flag SRD would need to incorporate the ORC license and attribute WotC by the CC BY agreement.

 

[Morrus]

because the Black Flag SRD uses parts of it,

Does it? I haven't checked, so it may well do, but my understanding was that their intention be that it did not for exactly that reason.

 

[see]

But if somebody uses the Black Flag SRD, they also need to attribute WotC according to CC BY Rules of their SRD because the Black Flag SRD uses parts of it

Sure. But that's not actually a problem with the way Kobold did this.

The ORC license says, "For the avoidance of doubt, both Licensor and all parties similarly credited under Licensor’s attribution notice should be included in Your attribution notice unless otherwise reasonably indicated by such parties."

When you look at the Attribution section in the in the Black Flag SRD, it includes the exact wording of the CC-BY attribution notice for the 5.1 SRD.

So, if someone adheres to the ORC license when using material from the Black Flag SRD, they will automatically adhere to the CC-BY attribution requirements for the 5.1 SRD.

 

[M_Natas]

Sure. But that's not actually a problem with the way Kobold did this.

The ORC license says, "For the avoidance of doubt, both Licensor and all parties similarly credited under Licensor’s attribution notice should be included in Your attribution notice unless otherwise reasonably indicated by such parties."

When you look at the Attribution section in the in the Black Flag SRD, it includes the exact wording of the CC-BY attribution notice for the 5.1 SRD.

So, if someone adheres to the ORC license when using material from the Black Flag SRD, they will automatically adhere to the CC-BY attribution requirements for the 5.1 SRD.

Then everything is totally fine.

 

[Cadence]

Sure. But that's not actually a problem with the way Kobold did this.

The ORC license says, "For the avoidance of doubt, both Licensor and all parties similarly credited under Licensor’s attribution notice should be included in Your attribution notice unless otherwise reasonably indicated by such parties."

When you look at the Attribution section in the in the Black Flag SRD, it includes the exact wording of the CC-BY attribution notice for the 5.1 SRD.

So, if someone adheres to the ORC license when using material from the Black Flag SRD, they will automatically adhere to the CC-BY attribution requirements for the 5.1 SRD.

Thanks for tracking that down!

 

[bedir than]

So, if someone adheres to the ORC license when using material from the Black Flag SRD, they will automatically adhere to the CC-BY attribution requirements for the 5.1 SRD.

It's not automatic.

It us a requirement. Plenty of IP related requirements were ignored before the OGL debacle and plenty will be again

 

[Marc Radle]

Hey everyone, happy to see the discussion!

As publishers, we understand the publishing cycle is a long one. As game designers, we know a lot of people are excited to start designing for Black Flag Roleplaying. This "taster" allows those designers to have a foundational document to start their own design while we finish up the full product. For those of you interested in playing BFR / Tales of the Valiant, this early BFRD release means you're more likely to have additional supplemental material for BFR not long after ToV officially releases next year, allowing you and your group to dive right in with plenty of fun options from us and others.