Game settings and copyright law

[Mistwell]

This is absolutely false. Please, nobody act on this information. It's just wrong.

It's a very bad idea - dangerous to yourself and others and quite possibily illegal - to post anything that can be taken as legal advice if you aren't sure you know what you're talking about. While it's up to the mods whether any action needs to be taken, I think it's important to make it clear in the strongest possible terms that doing so is a bad idea.

Okay, lets not get carried away. It is in no way illegal for a user to post their opinion about what they think the law is. Or at least, it is no more illegal than it is for you to be telling someone else that their post is illegal

 

[jmucchiello]

Fair Use is one example of some exceptions. There are others. Here is fair use:

Remember, fair use is not a right. It is a get out of jail free card. It is an excuss. It only exists in a court of law. In order to make "fair use" of copyrighted material, you must argue before a judge that your use falls under the fair use doctrine. If you are in court, you are out of pocket boatloads of money. Relying on fair use is extremely risky.

As others have said, the advice given by posters in internet forums is worth the amount you have paid for it. Be particularly sure not to listen to those who don't even spell copyright correctly. All the other advice is worth twice what you've paid for it.

 

[Cathix]

Also, consider contacting the publishers you're using material from. We had a guy send us an email asking if it was okay to use images and content from our Rassiya setting on the web page for his homebrew. We said sure, as long as you mention the source on the web page.

As far as eventually publishing it goes, you'll only be able to publish other publishers' material if it was OGC or if you have expressed permission from the publisher to do so. Most publishers will be happy to see their OGC material published elsewhere, because it's like free advertisement if the customer reads the copyright info in the back of the book.

Best thing is always to communicate and ask the publishers who's material interests you.

 

[Mistwell]

Remember, fair use is not a right. It is a get out of jail free card. It is an excuss. It only exists in a court of law. In order to make "fair use" of copyrighted material, you must argue before a judge that your use falls under the fair use doctrine. If you are in court, you are out of pocket boatloads of money. Relying on fair use is extremely risky.

As others have said, the advice given by posters in internet forums is worth the amount you have paid for it. Be particularly sure not to listen to those who don't even spell copyright correctly. All the other advice is worth twice what you've paid for it.

Every library, every newspaper, every news television show, every news radio show, and most teachers depend on the fair use doctrine every day. Your idea that it is not a right but a defense is meaningless as far as discussing what it means for someone like the original poster. It's both, much like copyright is both. If you are using material in a manner that is clearly within fair use or another exception, then it's as much a right as free speech - because it IS free speech. If you are using it in a gray area, it becomes a defense if you are sued.

 

[Storm Raven]

Actually according to copywrite law: Up to 10% of any copywrited material can be used in another publication by someone other than teh copywrite holder and still not violate copywrite law. So the trick is to figure out if the entire book is copywrited as a whole, or if the individual pieces you are wanting to use are copywrted seperately.

Of course you run into a whole new problem when you get into Intellectual Property Law.

This is what happens when people try to give legal advice over the internet. I am actually a lawyer, and I wouldn't. If I wanted a real legal question answered, I would consult an attorney knowledgeable in the subject matter area and give him all the relevant facts so he could evaluate the situation.

But, for a general background of IP law:

Copyright is intellectual property law. So is patent law, trademark law, and a couple other sundry areas of law.

Fair Use, which has been bandied about a lot here, is not a blanket safe haven for minor copying. There is no "10% rule" that applies generally. I know that there are some court cases that have said that no more than 10% is "nominal", but to be Fair Use, the use has to fall into certain categories of use - review, commentary, education, parody, and so on. If your use doesn't fall into these categories (and I'd consult a real, live, intellectual property law specialist to make sure one way or the other on that), then even a tiny fraction of copies work constitutes an infringement. You don't want to know what the statutory penalties are for copying (even if you make no commercial profit off of your infringing copies, they can get damages for the infringement, a set amount per infringement).

Copying for use in your home game is, technically, an infringement in many cases (but not all: some game books have a disclaimer, usually on the title page, that says "you can use copied material from this book for your home game"). However, as has been noted here, this sort of infringement is usually overlooked, as there is almost no liklihood that it will be brought to the copyright holder's attention, and it probably won't be something that the copyright holder will act upon anyway. So long as the copied material is being used by you and your friends at home, it probably isn't going to become an issue.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Game designs, etc. are covered by patent, not copyright law. That is how WotC crushed early games that copied their M:tG playstyle- like the complete ripoff Martial Arts CCG called Ultimate Combat (b.1995-d.1995)

Whether something is copyright infringement or not is, as has been pointed out, not something determined by a rigid rule. Instead, its a factual matter that gets tried before the Court.

Basically, if you use someone's copyrighted material without express permission (outside of the statutory loopholes of education, parody, etc.), you won't find out whether it is or not until after you've spent a lot of money on an attorney defending your claim...and in the meantime, there will be an injunction barring sales of your product until the court case is settled.

Under the Copyright Act, four factors are to be considered in order to determine whether a specific action is to be considered a "fair use": the purpose and character of the use, including commercial vs nonprofit or educational purposes; the copyrighted work's nature; the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole (did you use the best of the meat or just nibble around the edge?); and the effect of the use upon the copyrighted work's potential market value.

You might want to check out this commentary/summary: http://www.bitlaw.com/copyright/fair_use.html

IOW, either drop the copyrighted stuff or get permission. If your stuff is really good, either try to get them to publish it directly (admittedly a long shot) or try to get it published with an established game company (whose lawyers/negotiation teams could probably swing a D20 license). Publishing this solo is probably an exercise in heartache.

OTOH, if your stuff is REALLY good...the word of mouth your game develops might just reach the right ears. Try running it at cons, etc.- they may come to you.

 

[arscott]

That's not quite accurate. Very little is actually "illegal to photocopy" without exception. Some national security documents, for example, have no exceptions (you need permission, period). There are numerous exceptions to general U.S. Copyright law material, and if you meet an exception then you may photocopy it within the context of that exception.

Fair Use is one example of some exceptions. There are others.

I didn't mean to imply that it was automatically illegal for the OP to copy the material.

I was trying to say that the legality of is determined by the nature of his use, not how many people he shares the material with. If fair use (or similar exceptions) apply, then they're going to apply irrespective of how many people he shares the material with (except insofar as changing the number of recipients changes the purpose of the use).

The OP seemed to be under the impression that it's legal to use copyrighted material as long as the use is personal rather than public. According to my understanding, however, such a use is still usually illegal. It's just that in the latter case, the copyright holders simply don't care enough about the matter to take action.

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

The OP seemed to be under the impression that it's legal to use copyrighted material as long as the use is personal rather than public. According to my understanding, however, such a use is still usually illegal. It's just that in the latter case, the copyright holders simply don't care enough about the matter to take action.

IIRC, European law tends to be a bit more lenient when "fair use" is concerned - for example, you were allowed to make copies of CDs, software and so on as long as you owned the original and it was for personal use only.

Though that might be in the past - IIRC, there was some major discussion about some possible new legislations about this in the European parliament, but I don't know the results.

In any case, if you want to publish material and charge for it, it should be either original material that hasn't been published elsewhere, or OGL - in which case you need to adhere to the limitations of the Open Gaming Licence.

 

[Endur]

Game designs, etc. are covered by patent, not copyright law. That is how WotC crushed early games that copied their M:tG playstyle- like the complete ripoff Martial Arts CCG called Ultimate Combat (b.1995-d.1995)

Patent lawsuits are very expensive (over $1 million on average now). So for small businesses, it is not an actual patent lawsuit that stop behavior, but the threat of a patent lawsuit. When your business is small and the price of a license is too high, it might be cheaper to get out of the business than fight someone who has a patent.