Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Frylock's Gaming & Geekery Challenges WotC's Copyright Claims
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="doctorbadwolf" data-source="post: 7786599" data-attributes="member: 6704184"><p>Right, like, I wouldn't have included the depth perception part of the block. It's not a human with a missing eye, it's a creature that has never had two eyes, is not physically designed to have two eyes, whose brain is 100% guaranteed to not be designed to take sensory input from 2 eyes, etc, so I wouldn't try to represent only having 1 eye in any meaningful way. Especially not at 30 feat! </p><p></p><p>But, he also copyrighted his version, which seems to contradict the only potentially valid basis for his side of the argument. Either the information can be legitimately copyrighted, or it can't be. He isn't adding anything that is so distinct and creative that his is a valid copyright but wotc's isn't, it is the same information, with only the most mild rewording. The rewording itself is also entirely of information that he himself seems to believe cannot be legitimately copyrighted, because it's basic mechanical information. </p><p></p><p>Between all that, and the fact that he is making a huge deal out of a friendly "hey maybe don't copy-paste our work and then slap your own copyright notice on the bottom of it" letter from a company that would be well within their legal and ethical rights to be less friendly about it...and I'm not sympathetic at all. Even as a guy who view large corporations that hold copyrights over decades old IP that they purchased as subsidiary companies as inherently bad for the culture in which they operate, I find I can't place myself on this guy's side on this one.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="doctorbadwolf, post: 7786599, member: 6704184"] Right, like, I wouldn't have included the depth perception part of the block. It's not a human with a missing eye, it's a creature that has never had two eyes, is not physically designed to have two eyes, whose brain is 100% guaranteed to not be designed to take sensory input from 2 eyes, etc, so I wouldn't try to represent only having 1 eye in any meaningful way. Especially not at 30 feat! But, he also copyrighted his version, which seems to contradict the only potentially valid basis for his side of the argument. Either the information can be legitimately copyrighted, or it can't be. He isn't adding anything that is so distinct and creative that his is a valid copyright but wotc's isn't, it is the same information, with only the most mild rewording. The rewording itself is also entirely of information that he himself seems to believe cannot be legitimately copyrighted, because it's basic mechanical information. Between all that, and the fact that he is making a huge deal out of a friendly "hey maybe don't copy-paste our work and then slap your own copyright notice on the bottom of it" letter from a company that would be well within their legal and ethical rights to be less friendly about it...and I'm not sympathetic at all. Even as a guy who view large corporations that hold copyrights over decades old IP that they purchased as subsidiary companies as inherently bad for the culture in which they operate, I find I can't place myself on this guy's side on this one. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Frylock's Gaming & Geekery Challenges WotC's Copyright Claims
Top