D&D 5E Creative Commons and D&D

[overgeeked]

There are already a few hundred threads to talk about how the OGL works.

This thread is meant to be about Creative Commons.

If someone wants to open a compare and contrast thread, please do.

#

Compare and contrast the CC and OGL in this other thread, please.

D&D 5E - Compare and contrast CC and OGL

Do you want to discuss the differences between the Creative Commons and OGL? Here you go.

www.enworld.org

#

Since yesterday...wow...yesterday. What a week. What a month. What a year. Slow down 2023, you're drunk. Since WotC released the 5.1 SRD into the Creative Commons (here's the PDF) a lot of people have been talking about CC, the CC-BY 4.0 (the specific license WotC released 5.1 under), and how it all works. Given that most threads about all this are splintering into CC talk, it seemed like a good time to start a thread about CC specifically. So here goes.

Here's a list of resources for people to check out:

Homepage - Creative Commons

creativecommons.org

About CC Licenses - Creative Commons

Creative Commons licenses give everyone from individual creators to large institutions a standardized way to grant the public permission to use their creative work under copyright law. From the reuser’s perspective, the presence of a Creative Commons license on a copyrighted work answers the...

creativecommons.org

Deed - Attribution 4.0 International - Creative Commons

creativecommons.org

Frequently Asked Questions - Creative Commons

creativecommons.org

Recommended practices for attribution - Creative Commons

wiki.creativecommons.org

Creative Commons - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

#

Releasing content under CC is permanent and irrevocable.

Considerations for licensors and licensees - Creative Commons

wiki.creativecommons.org

Remember the license may not be revoked.​

Once you apply a CC license to your material, anyone who receives it may rely on that license for as long as the material is protected by copyright and similar rights, even if you later stop distributing it.

Frequently Asked Questions - Creative Commons

creativecommons.org

What if I change my mind about using a CC license?​

CC licenses are not revocable. Once something has been published under a CC license, licensees may continue using it according to the license terms for the duration of applicable copyright and similar rights. As a licensor, you may stop distributing under the CC license at any time, but anyone who has access to a copy of the material may continue to redistribute it under the CC license terms. While you cannot revoke the license, CC licenses do provide a mechanism for licensors to ask that others using their material remove the attribution information. You should think carefully before choosing a Creative Commons license.

Frequently Asked Questions - Creative Commons

creativecommons.org

What happens if the author decides to revoke the CC license to material I am using?​

The CC licenses are irrevocable. This means that once you receive material under a CC license, you will always have the right to use it under those license terms, even if the licensor changes his or her mind and stops distributing under the CC license terms. Of course, you may choose to respect the licensor’s wishes and stop using the work.

#

Once a month CC has office hours with their legal team if people have questions. Next one is 17 Feb 2023 at 10:00 PST. Uses Zoom.

Open Office Hours with CC's Legal Team - Creative Commons

(updated May 2024 with new link) Come join CC’s legal team for open office hours. Everyone is invited to meet with General Counsel Kat Walsh and Counsel Yuanxiao Xu to discuss legal issues related to CC licenses, CC0, and open sharing in general. We’ll start off with a few minutes talking about...

creativecommons.org

 

[EzekielRaiden]

So, because I goofed hard and told a bunch of people (thankfully, only in private Discord conversations) that the license was CC-BY-SA when it is only CC-BY, no "share-alike" requirement:

What, exactly, does CC-BY entail in terms of the adaptation creator's work? Consider the following, assuming I have written a book (novel-form, not game-form) using content under the 5.1 SRD CC-BY license:

1. Do people need to seek my permission to make adaptations from new content in that book that isn't contained in the 5.1 SRD? E.g., could I separately make allowances for certain kinds of adaptations and not others?
2. If someone wanted to make a movie about the unique content in my book, and not just the content already available in the 5.1 SRD, would they need to contact me and get permission?
3. Would I be able to tell an NFT-maker to coitus off if they tried to make NFTs of the characters in my book?
4. If a neo-Nazi, homophobe, bigot, or similarly feces-cranium type tried to exploit my work for whatever disgusting reason, would I be able to indicate in no uncertain terms which indiscreet parts of their anatomy they could insert their efforts into?

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

If you incorporate CC-BY content in your work, that does not give anyone any rights to use your work in any way that's not already allowed by Fair Use.

 

[Reynard]

So, because I goofed hard and told a bunch of people (thankfully, only in private Discord conversations) that the license was CC-BY-SA when it is only CC-BY, no "share-alike" requirement:

What, exactly, does CC-BY entail in terms of the adaptation creator's work? Consider the following, assuming I have written a book (novel-form, not game-form) using content under the 5.1 SRD CC-BY license:

1. Do people need to seek my permission to make adaptations from new content in that book that isn't contained in the 5.1 SRD? E.g., could I separately make allowances for certain kinds of adaptations and not others?
2. If someone wanted to make a movie about the unique content in my book, and not just the content already available in the 5.1 SRD, would they need to contact me and get permission?
3. Would I be able to tell an NFT-maker to coitus off if they tried to make NFTs of the characters in my book?
4. If a neo-Nazi, homophobe, bigot, or similarly feces-cranium type tried to exploit my work for whatever disgusting reason, would I be able to indicate in no uncertain terms which indiscreet parts of their anatomy they could insert their efforts into?

If I understand it correctly, you are not required to release your original work under CC-BY (or anything else). the only requirement is that you provide attribution for the SRD.

 

[overgeeked]

If you incorporate CC-BY content in your work, that does not give anyone any rights to use your work in any way that's not already allowed by Fair Use.

Correct. For something to be released under the CC-BY license the owner of that must release it under a CC-BY license.

So if you make a game using the CC SRD 5.1 you must include the attribution, but only that content which you specifically release under a CC license is covered by that license. Your whole work is not automatically released under CC-BY. That's not how it works.

 

[Reynard]

Does releasing the 5.1 SRD under CC-BY undermine the Open Gaming movement? If there is no "share alike" requirements, doesn't it incentivize publishers to create compatible, derivative works that they DO NOT themselves have any reason to release under CC?

 

[overgeeked]

I'm searching around and adding resources to the OP, so check there first. A lot of this stuff is specifically covered by Creative Commons websites.

 

[Cadence]

Does releasing the 5.1 SRD under CC-BY undermine the Open Gaming movement? If there is no "share alike" requirements, doesn't it incentivize publishers to create compatible, derivative works that they DO NOT themselves have any reason to release under CC?

Could people with the OGL 1.0a just put the new stuff under product identity? Or are there things they can't do that with under 1.0a?

 

[overgeeked]

Does releasing the 5.1 SRD under CC-BY undermine the Open Gaming movement? If there is no "share alike" requirements, doesn't it incentivize publishers to create compatible, derivative works that they DO NOT themselves have any reason to release under CC?

I'd say no more than the OGL did. There was no obligation under that to release anything as OGC. Same with this. If publishers want to release content they will. No change in that regard.

 

[overgeeked]

So, because I goofed hard and told a bunch of people (thankfully, only in private Discord conversations) that the license was CC-BY-SA when it is only CC-BY, no "share-alike" requirement:

What, exactly, does CC-BY entail in terms of the adaptation creator's work? Consider the following, assuming I have written a book (novel-form, not game-form) using content under the 5.1 SRD CC-BY license:

Do people need to seek my permission to make adaptations from new content in that book that isn't contained in the 5.1 SRD? E.g., could I separately make allowances for certain kinds of adaptations and not others?

Yes. Because you still own your content. Your content is not released under the CC-BY unless you specifically do so. CC-BY is not "viral" in that sense. The CC-BY-SA, however, is.

If someone wanted to make a movie about the unique content in my book, and not just the content already available in the 5.1 SRD, would they need to contact me and get permission?

Yes.

Would I be able to tell an NFT-maker to coitus off if they tried to make NFTs of the characters in my book?

Yes.

If a neo-Nazi, homophobe, bigot, or similarly feces-cranium type tried to exploit my work for whatever disgusting reason, would I be able to indicate in no uncertain terms which indiscreet parts of their anatomy they could insert their efforts into?

Yes.