Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Beleriphon" data-source="post: 7795352" data-attributes="member: 27847">The argument is you can't copyright a single word, regardless of how unique or original it might be. I can't claim copyright on &quot;flargatargaratbateranterun&quot; as a word. But my post as a whole I could. Frylock's basic argument is effectively that beholder can't be copyrighted (he's right), the block describer how use said monster can't be copyrighted (he's maybe right), so go ahead and reproduce the behold stat block if you want as long as you don't include the underlying descriptive material, which would be original and even using different words would make the description to similar to the WotC copyrightable material. Without the descriptive portion its all &quot;game mechanics&quot; and thus not subject to copyright.In effective his entire argument, including that the OGL and OGC material is not enforceable, relies on his argument that things like stat blocks and spell descriptions can't be sufficiently separated from the mechanical acts of rolling dice. There's probably a way to separate dice mechanics from the useful non-mechanical, or at least copyrightable expression there of part. If nothing else WotC argument will be that sure, you can reproduce that without infringing: Here's a dozen ways you can do it, stop using the one we chose.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Beleriphon, post: 7795352, member: 27847"] The argument is you can't copyright a single word, regardless of how unique or original it might be. I can't claim copyright on "flargatargaratbateranterun" as a word. But my post as a whole I could. Frylock's basic argument is effectively that beholder can't be copyrighted (he's right), the block describer how use said monster can't be copyrighted (he's maybe right), so go ahead and reproduce the behold stat block if you want as long as you don't include the underlying descriptive material, which would be original and even using different words would make the description to similar to the WotC copyrightable material. Without the descriptive portion its all "game mechanics" and thus not subject to copyright. In effective his entire argument, including that the OGL and OGC material is not enforceable, relies on his argument that things like stat blocks and spell descriptions can't be sufficiently separated from the mechanical acts of rolling dice. There's probably a way to separate dice mechanics from the useful non-mechanical, or at least copyrightable expression there of part. If nothing else WotC argument will be that sure, you can reproduce that without infringing: Here's a dozen ways you can do it, stop using the one we chose. [/QUOTE]

Verification