BOEF OGL Violation?

[The Sigil]

IANAL.

7. Use of Product Identity: You agree not to Use any Product Identity, including as an indication as to compatibility, except as expressly licensed in another, independent Agreement with the owner of each element of that Product Identity. You agree not to indicate compatibility or co-adaptability with any Trademark or Registered Trademark in conjunction with a work containing Open Game Content except as expressly licensed in another, independent Agreement with the owner of such Trademark or Registered Trademark. The use of any Product Identity in Open Game Content does not constitute a challenge to the ownership of that Product Identity. The owner of any Product Identity used in Open Game Content shall retain all rights, title and interest in and to that Product Identity.

Emphasis mine. While I'm not a lawyer, the phrase "in conjunction with a work" seems to me to indicate, not just "in" the work, but in anything related to it - that includes Press Releases, Ad Copy, and anything else.

Now, the lawyers may have a different view of it, but I think the phrase makes it pretty clear-cut... using a Trademark - like "D&D" is an absolute no-no - even if it's not actually in the product itself but only in your writing ABOUT the product.

--The Sigil

 

[DaveMage]

But doesn't the OGL and/or the d20 license also say that you have to post a copy of the OGL in any work containing such content?

Is it a reasonable expectation to post these licenses in a press release?

 

[cildarith]

I don't think press releases generally have any Open Game Content, therefore they don't need to include the license.

But ianal.

 

[The Sigil]

But doesn't the OGL and/or the d20 license also say that you have to post a copy of the OGL in any work containing such content?

Is it a reasonable expectation to post these licenses in a press release?

The Press Release contained no Open Game Content, therefore it did not need to have a copy of the OGL.

However, the press release was clearly released "in conjunction with" - in this case, read as: "regarding" - a work that DOES operate under the OGL (at least, if the release itself is to be believed).

Hence, while you are not required to include the OGL in the press release itself, you are bound by the restrictions in Section 7 when issuing the press release, as the press release is about an OGL product.

Note that Section 7 - which restricts your ability to reference the trademarks of others - is a portion of the Open Gaming License that extends beyond the published book itself.

--The Sigil

 

[kenjib]

But doesn't the OGL and/or the d20 license also say that you have to post a copy of the OGL in any work containing such content?

Is it a reasonable expectation to post these licenses in a press release?

In addition to what others have already said, the press release does not say "compatible with the System Reference Document." It says "Dungeons and Dragons." As I understand, you can put "System Reference Document," but not "Dungeons and Dragons" in section 15 of your OGL. "Dungeons and Dragons" was never released under the OGL and thus that is not allowed.

 

[Cedric]

The actual "press release" part of the announcement does not at all mention Dungeons and Dragons.

The parts of the article that mention D&D are in the comments from the person who posted the article, Damon White.

Nitpicking? Maybe...but that's what Law is all about.

Cedric

 

[Morrus]

The actual "press release" part of the announcement does not at all mention Dungeons and Dragons.

The parts of the article that mention D&D are in the comments from the person who posted the article, Damon White.

Nitpicking? Maybe...but that's what Law is all about.

Cedric

No. The "Tip Sheet" is part of the MS Word document sent out by Anthony Valterra to various people, including myself. It is all one document. I can't see any justification for applying the rules to one and not the other - the license itself doesn't distinguish between press releases and other materials.

I'll attach the original here, so you can see what I mean.

As an aside - D&D can be mentioned with permission. While WotC's announcement pretty much condemned the book, it doesn't mention permission. AV is the guy who, presumably would give that permission (unless it is something handled directly by the Licensing Dept.).

 

[S'mon]

On my lawyerly analysis, the press release is not released under the OGL (there would be no reason to do so, plus as has been noted one of the terms of the OGL is that you include it with material released under it) and therefore its terms do not apply to the press release. The normal rules of US copyright & trademark law (including fair use provisions) therefore apply to the press release.

Edit: The OGL is a unilateral contract, you agree to its terms & a work becomes bound by it when you include it with that work, which gains the benefits and disbenefits of the OGL. The OGL is not included in the press release, and the press release therefore neither benefits nor disbenefits from the OGL.

 

[BigFreekinGoblinoid]

BoEF... BoEM is the Book of Eldritch Might.

uhh yeah! finger trained for that one - still funny though...

 

[Cedric]

This is just my opinion...

But I think WoTC gave permission to reference D&D and had their response, "in the can" before the press release went out.

This has generated a great deal of feedback and attention for both AV and WoTC...and when your name is in the news for stuff like this, it's a good thing. Controversy sells.

But that's just speculation...

Cedric