Oofta
Legend
Gah, sorry.
Too many posts, especially about something I don't really care about much one way or another other than to point out that you don't need a license to stream a D&D game as long as you follow some simple rules.
D&D General Critical Role Ending
Too many posts, especially about something I don't really care about much one way or another other than to point out that you don't need a license to stream a D&D game as long as you follow some simple rules.
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
The cartoon is based on their live stream game and has been picked up by Amazon. That means that their content is being sold/licensed to a third party for compensation.
I think they'd need licensing to use trademark/copyright at this point.
MarkB
Legend
And, as I said, all of that content derives from the shows. So anytime a piece of WotC IP is used prominently in the show, it becomes a major stumbling block to any attempt to create other products based upon that element of the show.
Parmandur
Book-Friend
Yeah, I think it has more to do with concious decision on their part to avoid any possible future conflicts, since they actually have a better than average grasp of the possible complications.Gah, sorry.
Too many posts, especially about something I don't really care about much one way or another other than to point out that you don't need a license to stream a D&D game as long as you follow some simple rules.
Oofta
Legend
Yep. Books, cartoons, board games, etc. will all involve lawyers.
I am not a lawyer (in the sense that I am not licensed to practice law in any jurisdiction). I am an academic lawyer (ie I work in a university law school). As well as legal research and teaching I research and teach in philosophy.
If I wanted to run a commercial enterprise based around using/performing D&D adventures, I would not rely on the WotC fan policy, as this policy requires the fan content be available for free. That puts obvious limits on commercialisation (eg no sales of books, videos etc).
The OGL deals with some of the copyright issues that might arise. It deliberately excludes use of a wide range of names that WotC asserts to be trademarks and/or product identity.
So it wouldn't surprise me if a commercial streaming show were to minimise its use of these names, as an alternative to seeking a licence from WotC.
If I wanted to run a commercial enterprise based around using/performing D&D adventures, I would not rely on the WotC fan policy, as this policy requires the fan content be available for free. That puts obvious limits on commercialisation (eg no sales of books, videos etc).
The OGL deals with some of the copyright issues that might arise. It deliberately excludes use of a wide range of names that WotC asserts to be trademarks and/or product identity.
So it wouldn't surprise me if a commercial streaming show were to minimise its use of these names, as an alternative to seeking a licence from WotC.
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
Right, but since it's all based on their live stream game, the live stream is part of what's being sold to third parties. They'd need to get licenses for that now as well, where before they started all of this they wouldn't have.
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
Hah! I remembered correctly.
overgeeked
B/X Known World
Yeah. Really. I was using that list as an example. Those are things WotC protects more than the rest. I never said CR only uses OGL content.
Oofta
Legend
I'm sure they've been talking to WOTC for a while, especially once they decided to start selling other products. Considering how big they've gotten I assume they were chatting before that. On the other hand, just because your stream makes money it does not mean you automatically stop using official published material. Which is all I was pointing out. That, and I don't see them going out of their way to avoid monsters or classes not covered under the OGL. Lots of DMs make up their own stuff.
Similar Threads
