Can I Get the OGC From M&M?

[Blacksad]

Actually, I have a lot more respect for you then I would for someone who asks where they can download a scanned copy.

ditto

Darksoldier- If you want free d20 super rules:

http://www.arcdream.com/pdf/GodlikeOpenSource.pdf

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wild-Talents/

The first link is toward the OGC section of Godlike, which lack the power creation rules.

The second link is toward the Wild-Talent playtest group, which use the Godlike rules, so you'll find the power creation rules inside.

Here you have an aclaimed free "d20" super game, though it lacks the publicity of MnM.

 

[philreed]

Thank You and more . . .

this kind of distribution might seriously hamper the PDF side of the industry given the sales number of some publisher (in the hundreds after several months, with top notch PDF, like those from Philip J Reed).

Thanks for thinking of my work as top notch.

I currently release my D20 PDFs as 100% open game content. I've already learned that the PDfs are on Kazaa which seriously pisses me off. If people want the stuff why can't they just spend a little money? It's cheaper than buying lunch at McDs (but not Taco Bell, that stuff's cheaper than food . . . 2 bean burritos and a drink for $2?).

If I noticed that the text was being cut from my PDFs and uploaded to a website, no matter how much the OGL was followed, I'd probably start getting stingy with my OGC. The idea isn't so that one person can buy a copy and distribute it. The idea is that a publisher can use a treasure, book, feat, spell, monster, whatever from my D20 PDfs in their own products. (Or fansite that's following the OGL.)

I've used OGC from other sources in my PDFs but I've never just taken a product and gone wild. The only thing that stops me from releasing something like Guildcraft in PDF is the fact that I feel it would be wrong for me to do so. I'll probably create a guild using the system in that book but I will not just publish their entire book even though it's 100% OGC.

Sorry. I'm rambling.

 

[Hollywood]

Re: Thank You and more . . .

Then there is the thing called Professional Courtesy. Monte Cook did an essay about promoting the etiquette of asking the author's permission despite the legal "safe harbor" provided by the OGL.

If the author has declared something as OGC, then he's already given his permission to use it. With exception of the game mechanics, which unless a mechanic consists of a PI, which are already automatically OGC, the OGL does not allow others to automatically use content. Only if the content is declared as OGC. When you do that, you are saying, "hey, I think this is cool enough that I want anyone to be able to use it". That is of course, as long as you follow the OGL and include the copyright statements, etc. since OGC is still copyright the original author.

I currently release my D20 PDFs as 100% open game content. I've already learned that the PDfs are on Kazaa which seriously pisses me off. If people want the stuff why can't they just spend a little money? It's cheaper than buying lunch at McDs (but not Taco Bell, that stuff's cheaper than food . . . 2 bean burritos and a drink for $2?).

Ok, its going to be available on Kazaa, or other networks, no matter what you do especially when you are selling PDFs. At least its not like someone took the time [for god knows why] to scan an entire 300-page book to put on Kazaa.

But frankly if the content you have produced is 100% OGC, then anyone can take it and republish it and sell if or give it away free... and you get nothing. About all they are violating is the copyrights on the layout you might have in your pdfs, but I doubt thats the primary emphasis you have placed on your work, its the content.

Some of the Mongoose products, off the top of my head, suffer from this too. About all thats not OGC'd is the name Mongoose, because its trademarked, and the layout of the book. There is absolutely nothing that says someone else can't come along, take the material, republish it in a new layout or as part of a new product and as long as they include the Mongoose copyright in the OGL, its prefectly "fine".

On the other hand, if it wasn't completely 100% OGC, i.e. all the flavor text is not OGC, then yes, I could see where you'd really be steamed.

The idea isn't so that one person can buy a copy and distribute it.

No, but it was a concern that I remember being addressed way back when the OGL was initially being breached by Dancy.

The idea is that a publisher can use a treasure, book, feat, spell, monster, whatever from my D20 PDfs in their own products. (Or fansite that's following the OGL.)

Then the product needs to be designed that way, with targeted OGC useage and not blanketed usage. I.e. Mutants and Masterminds is frankly pretty much wide open as far as OGC material goes... however, certain key sections are NOT OGC and makes the game unplayable unless you are savy enough to create your own rules to put in place of the ones that aren't OGC.

 

[Ranger REG]

Re: Re: Thank You and more . . .

If the author has declared something as OGC, then he's already given his permission to use it. With exception of the game mechanics, which unless a mechanic consists of a PI, which are already automatically OGC, the OGL does not allow others to automatically use content. Only if the content is declared as OGC. When you do that, you are saying, "hey, I think this is cool enough that I want anyone to be able to use it". That is of course, as long as you follow the OGL and include the copyright statements, etc. since OGC is still copyright the original author.

While this give you the legal right (provided you abide by the terms of the license), it goes a long way to establish yourself as a game designer if you give Common Courtesy (though not required by law, but as a sign of respect toward fellow human beings).

Even if you're not asking for permission, the least you could do is drop a note to the author of the OGC that you will be using their material. After all, in this business, it is good to have connection and it all start with giving each other Common Courtesy.

 

[Hollywood]

Re: Re: Re: Thank You and more . . .

While this give you the legal right (provided you abide by the terms of the license), it goes a long way to establish yourself as a game designer if you give Common Courtesy (though not required by law, but as a sign of respect toward fellow human beings).

Sorry, I disagree. Anyone whose written anything on the SRD dropped Wizards and asked them for permission? Doubtful, at least not these days.

And Monte's is only one voice on the matter and its his opinion.

A sign of respect is to give your fellow creatives, whether it be tabletop game design or open source software, the proper credit where credit is due. That is respect.

The other is a personal perference, but may be a nightmare if the other party involved isn't prompt in answering queries, etc.

But it bottom line, as long as you give the proper copyrights, the author of the material by certifing all or parts of it has Open Gaming Content has given anyone the right to use it as he or she feels fit without the need for consultation.

Even if you're not asking for permission, the least you could do is drop a note to the author of the OGC that you will be using their material. After all, in this business, it is good to have connection and it all start with giving each other Common Courtesy.

Giving notice to someone that you've used that material could be considered common courtesy [it doesn't need to be capitalized btw], sure. And is probably a good thing to do. However, its not the same thing as asking for permission to use something the author has already, through a blanket license, given you the permission to use.

That all being said, I did ask for permission to use some OGC material for a piece I was intended to throw out, as OGC, to the public.. but never have due to lack of time. And I did get a fair response, so wasn't a big deal.

However, that being said, I am planning to do some stuff with the MMSuperLink [akin to a less limited d20 license] that GreenRonin put together... but I'm not going to ask them for permission. However, I will drop Steve Kenison a note when I'm close to tossing it out to the masses just to let me know for his own amusement.

And to end this with a something that pertains to the topic... I think having the community put together a high-quality, such as GR did with their M&M Errata [which is far better than WotC has done], SRD for M&M would be a great thing.

 

[Ranger REG]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Thank You and more . . .

Sorry, I disagree. Anyone whose written anything on the SRD dropped Wizards and asked them for permission? Doubtful, at least not these days.

I'm not referring to Wizards, who started all of this. I'm referring to Contributors who made their material OGC in their own product.

And Monte's is only one voice on the matter and its his opinion.

And everyone in the OGF mailing list agree with him, most of the are publishers.

A sign of respect is to give your fellow creatives, whether it be tabletop game design or open source software, the proper credit where credit is due. That is respect.

That is one way, but not a direct way. I don't understand why you would not take the time to say, "Hey, I like your work with Mutants & Mastermind, Chris Pramas & Green Ronin, that I'm going to use this OGC and that OGC."

Is there no such thing as communicating with fellow publisher?

However, that being said, I am planning to do some stuff with the MMSuperLink [akin to a less limited d20 license] that GreenRonin put together... but I'm not going to ask them for permission. However, I will drop Steve Kenison a note when I'm close to tossing it out to the masses just to let me know for his own amusement.

And to end this with a something that pertains to the topic... I think having the community put together a high-quality, such as GR did with their M&M Errata [which is far better than WotC has done], SRD for M&M would be a great thing.

Well, that's what I'm talking about. Give him props by dropping him a note. It may not be legally required, but we are not a race of legality. We are a social race. Just don't let the law dictate how you should interact. Go above and beyond.

That's all I ask... Common Courtesy. Don't be anti-social.

 

[Hollywood]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Thank You and more . . .

That is one way, but not a direct way. I don't understand why you would not take the time to say, "Hey, I like your work with Mutants & Mastermind, Chris Pramas & Green Ronin, that I'm going to use this OGC and that OGC."

Well, because Chris Pramas and Green Ronin only published it. Steve Keneson wrote it, so he's the person who should be thanked if any.

And besides, what you wrote is a far cry from asking for permission.

Is there no such thing as communicating with fellow publisher?

Sure, but not if it comes down to being a mutual adoration club [I'm not saying it is at all, it just starts to look like it after a certain point].

Take something thats pretty similiar, modding for FPS and other games. Been around a lot longer than the OGL thing. Guess what, people don't write in to John Carmack and Tim Sweeney and ask for permission every time when they want to put out a mod to their game. No, by the EULA and other things, they have already given you the right to do so without needing to ask. Most people do give them props in one way or another, but its neither a requirement.

 

[Blacksad]

hm

Then the product needs to be designed that way, with targeted OGC useage and not blanketed usage. I.e. Mutants and Masterminds is frankly pretty much wide open as far as OGC material goes... however, certain key sections are NOT OGC and makes the game unplayable unless you are savy enough to create your own rules to put in place of the ones that aren't OGC.

Except that Green Ronin didn't want to let anyone be able to create a supergame based on their rules, and with enough money to hire a lawer, it's easier for them to target core elements of their supergame.

and, you might want to use 1 treasure from 101 mundane treasures, and considering that it might be any of the 101, it would be silly to close some and not the other.

However, that being said, I am planning to do some stuff with the MMSuperLink [akin to a less limited d20 license] that GreenRonin put together... but I'm not going to ask them for permission. However, I will drop Steve Kenison a note when I'm close to tossing it out to the masses just to let me know for his own amusement.

You speak of something you don't know, you have to ask directly from Green Ronin to get the MMsuperlink license.

Also, the fact that someone do not ask permission on software has probably something to do with the fact that when you use a library, the contributor to it are sometimes in the hundreds, and that you have thousands of user, so it's not practical to do so, that's why people do send e-mail asking for permission, not because it's good manners.

 

[Hollywood]

Re: hm

Except that Green Ronin didn't want to let anyone be able to create a supergame based on their rules, and with enough money to hire a lawer, it's easier for them to target core elements of their supergame.

Yes, that was my point.

You speak of something you don't know, you have to ask directly from Green Ronin to get the MMsuperlink license.

Sigh, caught up in my own words. Actually I am doing it under the OGL, not the MM SuperLink, since it doesn't need to be tied back to MM.

But yes, you are correct, to use the MMSuperLink you do indeed have to drop them a note and let them know whats up, etc. But that is ONLY if you are going to use the MMSuperLink. If you are using only the OGC under the OGL terms, i.e. do not care about tieing it back to M&M, you don't need to use the MMSuperLink at all.

Nonetheless, the point is still valid, you do NOT have to ask for permission to use the OGC from MM.

Also, the fact that someone do not ask permission on software has probably something to do with the fact that when you use a library, the contributor to it are sometimes in the hundreds, and that you have thousands of user, so it's not practical to do so, that's why people do send e-mail asking for permission, not because it's good manners.

The number of participants in open source software range from one to several hundred or more. However, on almost any decent open-source software project, there is a core team and usually a project lead. If you really want to ask permission, these are the people you would need to contact.

Suffice to say, that it is not uncouth or against good manners not to ask to use something, if permission has already been given to use it whether it be from a license or some other form of identification. If permission hasn't been granted, or permission [MMSuperLink would be an example of this] is granted only if you contact and make arrangements, then yes you need to do that both from a social/manners standpoint and usually a legal standpoint.

And to once AGAIN, draw this back to the original post... if you were going to produce an SRD for MM, you could do so with the OGC material. However, because you can not tie it back, in any really meaningful and readily apparent way, to MM it probably wouldn't mean much. So the MMSuperLink comes into play, which does mean you need to drop a note to GR and then the PDF [or whatever publishing form as allowed under the MMSuperLicense] does need to be submitted for approval.

P.S. Btw, in a thread that is dealing with manners, common courtesy, etc. its best when correcting someone to do so using manners and common courtesy, rather than a more, say, uncouth way of doing it. Not that I'm bothered at all by it...:/

P.P.S. It appears that GR's sites been hacked for the second time in as many days.

 

[Ranger REG]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Thank You and more . . .

Well, because Chris Pramas and Green Ronin only published it. Steve Keneson wrote it, so he's the person who should be thanked if any.

And besides, what you wrote is a far cry from asking for permission.

Personally, Chris Pramas should be given praise for bringing MnM to life as much as Steve Kenson. Just because he is a publisher does not mean he should be ignored.

Take something thats pretty similiar, modding for FPS and other games. Been around a lot longer than the OGL thing. Guess what, people don't write in to John Carmack and Tim Sweeney and ask for permission every time when they want to put out a mod to their game. No, by the EULA and other things, they have already given you the right to do so without needing to ask. Most people do give them props in one way or another, but its neither a requirement.

Fine. That's up to you. It's not like I'm supposed to teach you etiquette.