Getting OSRIC/AD&D into FLGS and publishers

[Mark]

As I understand it OSRIC has not been proven legal, and WotC has declined to comment. Unless and until WotC chooses to challenge OSRIC, it's copyright status is questionable. Supporting OSRIC is risky in that sense. If WotC does decide to pursue action against OSRIC, then anyone supporting it may have to destroy or rework their products. At least one 3rd party publisher has stated quite clearly on these boards that the thinks OSRIC is infringing, so that he won't touch it with a ten foot poll.

Not that I disagree but this is an interesting situation.

XPR's JGBrowning publishes material and has no legal objections to OSRIC, apparently, and Goodman Games, who has probably the strongest 4E 3PP presence publishes 1E compatible(?) material. There are others but let's call these the most prominent from the 3.XE 3PP era moving forward.

On the other hand, Peterson of Necro, who obviously loves to publish old school material and has had long and regular legal discussions with WotC, apparently says that he believes that OSRIC is not in good legal standing in regard to copyrights.

The owners of the OSRIC IP have said that WotC has taken no legal action against OSRIC and, AFAIK, the WotC legal department has not even sent a C&D letter regarding one word of text or image in OSRIC.

Does this fairly sum up the three main positions regarding the legality of OSRIC? Is there more to be added? Is there a big shadow hanging over the legality of OSRIC because of unsubstantiated information that we as a community are unfairly perpetuating?

 

[Mark]

I'm not saying the old Grongnardia blog is 100% accurage (. . .)

Whatever truly is?

 

[ggroy]

If I saw OSRIC at a local FLGS, I would probably pick it up, if for no other reason than the arrangement and layout being better organized than the original 1E AD&D PHB and DMG. The first time I looked through the 1E AD&D DMG back in the day, I thought it looked like a disorganized mess.

The question is how many FLGS will actually carry such a book. Of the local FLGS I check out every once in a while, I can only think of one or two which would possibly stock something like OSRIC. The other local FLGS typically don't carry anything much beyond WotC, Paizo, White Wolf, etc ... and where their main business is in other things like comic books, CCGs, manga, and toys.

 

[Umbran]

Does this fairly sum up the three main positions regarding the legality of OSRIC? Is there more to be added? Is there a big shadow hanging over the legality of OSRIC because of unsubstantiated information that we as a community are unfairly perpetuating?

You summarized the situation as I understand it.

How large the shadow is we cannot guess - it depends entirely on how aggressive WotC is apt to be if OSRIC becomes successful. We aren't in a position to guess. This is a risk assessment each publisher has to make on their own.

One thing to note is that this is not a trademark question, but a copyright question - WotC's silence so far means little. It does not legally weaken their case if they choose to act later.

 

[MichaelSomething]

The owners of the OSRIC IP have said that WotC has taken no legal action against OSRIC and, AFAIK, the WotC legal department has not even sent a C&D letter regarding one word of text or image in OSRIC.

I think that OSRIC is in some sort of middle ground. Illegal enough to cast doubts among some but legal enough to make stopping it too difficult/expensive to make it worth while.

It also seems that the people who made OSRIC simply lack the business skillset and/or resources to get their books out there. It's gonna be up to the fans to get out and promote the game.

May I suggest walking into a FLGS and offering to run open OSRIC games?

 

[ggroy]

For an inactive "abandoned" piece of intellectual property, I wonder how long of a "grace period" the law allows for until the copyright expires. This may vary for different jurisdictions.

Judging from scans of old books at web sites like archive.org, they seem to mainly scan books which are older than 90 years old.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

For FLGS, niche RPGs don't reliably sell. Its not like 4E or even White Wolf where they can just stock it and expect it to move. Sure they have to promote or push something, but are the benefits worth the effort? How much is a niche product like OSRIC really going to sell, best case scenario? A FLGS can't be expected to do this for every 3PP book, the 3PP market just doesn't justify it. OSRIC would have to be something truly special. I don't think it is. The retro movement is a niche within a niche, and OSRIC is a further niche within a niche within a niche.

It also doesn't help that OSRIC does have to compete with eBay selling the real 1E books. I picked them up last year at a very reasonable price. Why buy the copy when you can get the original?

As for publishers, its one niche further removed, and not part of any serious business plan.

 

[Mark]

Cornell University has this information posted -

Copyright Term and the Public Domain in the United States

How large the shadow is we cannot guess - it depends entirely on how aggressive WotC is apt to be if OSRIC becomes successful.

This strikes me as more of the same shadow-casting, by which I mean that a shadow is not a substantial thing. A soapbubble can cast a long shadow. WotC is not casting any shadows, nor taking any actions. The only person of which I am aware with a legal resume who I have seen cast OSRIC in a negative light legally is Peterson of Necro, and even he has not stated anything definitive that I have read or heard. Is there some second legal source that would go on the record and actually state some more definitive position on if, how and why OSRIC might be legally untenable? If not, I think it would be more fair to just let that bugaboo rest until such a time as something substantial from the IP holders (currently WotC) states otherwise.

 

[grodog]

Cornell University has this information posted -

Copyright Term and the Public Domain in the United States

Thanks, Mark: that's very handy, and now bookmarked

This strikes me as more of the same shadow-casting, by which I mean that a shadow is not a substantial thing. A soapbubble can cast a long shadow. WotC is not casting any shadows, nor taking any actions. The only person of which I am aware with a legal resume who I have seen cast OSRIC in a negative light legally is Peterson of Necro, and even he has not stated anything definitive that I have read or heard.

FWIW, at various times some other old school publishers have joined Clark in voicing concerns about OSRIC legality/morality/whatever, including Kenzer & Co. and Troll Lord Games.

Is there some second legal source that would go on the record and actually state some more definitive position on if, how and why OSRIC might be legally untenable? If not, I think it would be more fair to just let that bugaboo rest until such a time as something substantial from the IP holders (currently WotC) states otherwise.

Ding.

 

[Ariosto]

For some publishers, that some very key sections of OSRIC (e.g., monsters and magic items) are not Open Game Content is a barrier -- one that seems to me odd to have erected in the first place (but I am not an expert on any of the issues involved).

Then, there's the question of OSRIC's value as a brand. If one uses it, then one is bound by the Open Game License, which prohibits use of trademarks without explicit permission. That means there's a choice between referring to OSRIC or indicating compatibility with AD&D (which could be "fair use" without WotC's permission). This may be a bit muddied if the AD&D trademark has lapsed.

The notion that OSRIC's legality must be notably questionable until there's a lawsuit over it (which could be never) seems to me bizarre -- especially as I see no reason it should not apply likewise to every OGL product.

Having a frivolous case need be no bar to bringing suit in the U.S.A. -- but I think that in the case of OSRIC it would have to be pursued in the UK (which is quite another ballgame).

Meanwhile, WotC apparently can withdraw at whim the GSL.

It would probably be encouraging to retailers if they could sell the rule book. I suspect that would not be profitable enough under the current arrangement. I'm not sure, though, as I think Barnes & Noble gets Labyrinth Lord via Lulu (and saves customers the shipping fees).

Labyrinth Lord seems to be ahead of the game in dealing with the distribution "middle man" and establishing a retail presence, as Castles & Crusades already has done.

Still, I understand that some game stores routinely stock Expeditious Retreat Press modules. If there's demand that's profitable to fill, then some shopkeepers are likely to recognize it. Whether that demand is coming from people using OSRIC or from people using old AD&D books, or C&C, or some other rules set is immaterial.

The whole "publishing tool" aspect has been from the start hard for me to grasp, perhaps in part because I am no great fan of "stat blocks" in modules (but maybe a bit eccentric in that regard). WotC (or anyone else) can hardly claim ownership of dragons, dwarfs and rings of invisibility!

The ready availability of the classic rules in a more accessible presentation, though, is something I can easily understand! Having spell descriptions ordered alphabetically is just one example of the utility OSRIC offers. Whatever the case for module publishers (and I'm not all that big on modules in the first place), the book is a boon for players.