Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 7668914" data-attributes="member: 42582">The GSL permitted publishers to use various material in respect of which WotC enjoyed IP rights: various table formats that might amount to trade dress, or in respect of which WotC might have copyright claims; various words and phrases in respect of which WotC might want to assert copyright (eg feat names); and various compatibility logos and phrases.That's not pointless, for a publisher who wants to use that material.The release of the SRD under the OGL permits publishers who become party to the OGL to use various material in respect of which WotC enjoys copyright (a whole lot of rules text, and some flavour text).Without having seen the text of an GG "Fifth Edition Fantasy" product, I am going to guess that they do not reproduce any text in respect of which WotC has a plausible copyright claim (eg no reproduction of whole chunks of rules text or flavour text). I also doubt that they format any new monsters using the same fonts and colours as the Monster Manual. And they won't use any compatibility language or logos that might trade on WotC's trademarks.A publisher who does want to do one or more of these things might be waiting for some sort of licence. (Eg look at Fantasy Grounds, which is using the D&D logo.)Perhaps because they aren't confident enough as to where the boundaries of permissibility lie?Not very much of this is exact science.Intellectual property isn't really my field, which is why I'm confining myself to generalities. (And am definitely not giving legal advice!) But for what it's worth, my gut feeling is that adventures are easier than rules supplements.An adventure is mostly fiction (characters, events, maps, etc) that the publisher has authored. (You probably wouldn't want to publish an adventure that draws heavily on monster backgrounds spelled out in the MM, though - that could potentially infringe on WotC's copyright.)The mechanical information that appears in an adventure is likely to be pretty simple (eg hp totals, perhaps spell lists - in which case maybe stick to spell names that are very generic and/or appear in the SRD, and in the latter case use the OGL).Rules supplements, on the other hand, are likely to make more reference to and use of text that is published in WotC's rulebooks, at which point the boundaries of permissibility seem to me to become more fraught.All those URLs tell us is that some uses of trademarks are permitted to refer to the trademark owner's products. They aren't relevant to this issue, given that (as far as I am aware) GG is not using any of WotC's trademarks (whether nominatively or otherwise).</blockquote>

Verification