OGL Hello, I am lawyer with a PSA: almost everyone is wrong about the OGL and SRD. Clearing up confusion.

mamba

Hero
I just don't see how something can't be both at the same time under those definitions. If you could enlighten me as to why I might be mistaken in that regard, I would be very grateful.
Well, I cannot help you there then, I did that two posts up and apparently failed ;)

Let's turn this around, what is WotC's Open Game Content a derivative of?
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

Hussar

Legend
I'm sorry, but how pointless is this line of thought? Even if WotC is a licensor, who cares? It's licensed TO ITSELF. What, it's going to sue itself for violating the license? Since WotC is the licensor, it's not actually bound to the agreements within the license in practical terms since there is no one who can actually enforce that license. Well, again, WotC could enforce the license upon itself, but, since that's incredibly unlikely, who cares?
 

Well, I cannot help you there then, I did that two posts up and apparently failed ;)

Let's turn this around, what is WotC's Open Game Content a derivative of?
I've re-read your post to make sure this isn't a reading comprehension issue on my part.

I still don't get it. It appears to me that Open Game Content becomes Derivative Material of Open Game Content when it's effectively "plagiarized" under these terms, but it doesn't stop being OGC by virtue thereof. It would have to be both, going by the definition of Open Game Content in Section 1(d).
 

mamba

Hero
I've re-read your post to make sure this isn't a reading comprehension issue on my part.

I still don't get it. It appears to me that Open Game Content becomes Derivative Material of Open Game Content when it's effectively "plagiarized" under these terms, but it doesn't stop being OGC by virtue thereof. It would have to be both, going by the definition of Open Game Content in Section 1(d).
how about you answer the question I asked instead. Yes, chances are something can be both, all you need to do is publish your derivative material as OGC, but what is WotC’s OGC derivative of…
 

how about you answer the question I asked instead. Yes, chances are something can be both, all you need to do is publish your derivative material as OGC, but what is WotC’s OGC derivative of…
In the legal sense? Lots of things, most of it in the public domain though. In the context of this being Derivative Material in the context of this contract, it isn't. It's just Open Game Content.
 

mamba

Hero
In the legal sense? Lots of things, most of it in the public domain though. In the context of this being Derivative Material in the context of this contract, it isn't. It's just Open Game Content.
aha, so under the terms of the OGL it is not derivative material then, that was the point
 




This could still mean that I'm allowed to license my Derivative Material of their Open Game Content to anyone else though. And as I've understood it, Derivative Material does include verbatim copies of their Open Game Content.
 


Citizen Mane

The Kajamba Lion
This could still mean that I'm allowed to license my Derivative Material of their Open Game Content to anyone else though. And as I've understood it, Derivative Material does include verbatim copies of their Open Game Content.
I've been re-reading 1(b), and I can't help but think that, despite the fact that we can read the license to get where you're going, that it's not intended to be read this way. The entire list suggests that the intention was to deal with changing existing works in the definition and not to suggest that all OGC was Derivative Materials. I'm not entirely sure that the ambiguity in drafting is significant enough to be read against WotC, but I guess it could be. At least it's not something I would want to test myself.

There's also part of me that finds myself reading the clause as if the list is offset as I'm showing below. I don't know how convincing I find it, as it's still awkward, but the awkward drafting's in line with some things that I've seen at my day job lately.
"Derivative Material" means copyrighted material [comma] including derivative works and translations (including into other computer languages), potation, modification, correction, addition, extension, upgrade, improvement, compilation, abridgment or other form [comma] in which an existing work may be recast, transformed or adapted

Edited for clarity and to add in a missing word. Edit in Italics.
 

mamba

Hero
This could still mean that I'm allowed to license my Derivative Material of their Open Game Content to anyone else though. And as I've understood it, Derivative Material does include verbatim copies of their Open Game Content.
You are definitely allowed to license your Derivative Material as OGC. It can even include parts WotC's OGC verbatim. The question eventually becomes 'are you still allowed to do so when WotC deauthorizes the OGL 1.0a' and the answer to that is 'no'. The question whether WotC can actually deauthorized it is probably also 'no', but from the looks of it, they want to find out in court ;)
 



mamba

Hero
Nothing. Why does it need to be derivative of anything?
we just went through this... if it is not derivative material, then WotC is not using the OGC. See

"(g) "Use", "Used" or "Using" means to use, Distribute, copy, edit, format, modify, translate and otherwise create Derivative Material of Open Game Content"
 

FrogReaver

As long as i get to be the frog
we just went through this... if it is not derivative material, then WotC is not using the OGC. See

"(g) "Use", "Used" or "Using" means to use, Distribute, copy, edit, format, modify, translate and otherwise create Derivative Material of Open Game Content"
Otherwise creating derivative material is but one way of using OGC. Distributing OGC is not creating derivative material but is using it (by the definition of the license).

*I see how you are trying to read that sentence but that’s not the way to read it.
 

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
2. The FAQ also claims that distributing under the OGL 1.0a (even for works wholly your own) makes you a licensee - implication being that WOTC is also a licensee to the OGL 1.0a.
Here's an analogy that might make it easier to understand.

Suppose I have a large supply of chocolate brownies. I got to a public space and put the brownies out and tell people, "Feel free to take these brownies. You can repurpose them by changing their shape, or even for use in making deserts that are all your own. You can't use walnuts in them, though, because that's not part of this. If you choose to take and distribute the brownie in any form, you agree to pay me $1."

Anyone who takes a brownie for use that I approved of there will have to pay me a $1, but if I walk up to those brownies, hopefully it's clear that I don't owe myself $1. They're my brownies.

WotC doesn't use the license to put out the things that it owns. Only others do that. :)
 

Otherwise creating derivative material is but one way of using OGC. Distributing OGC is not creating derivative material but is using it (by the definition of the license).

*I see how you are trying to read that sentence but that’s not the way to read it.
It's pretty clear that they can unilaterally cease to distribute (small D) their OGC though.
 

mamba

Hero
Otherwise creating derivative material is but one way of using OGC.
So what sentence are you referring to then?

Distributing OGC is not creating derivative material but is using it (by the definition of the license).

*I see how you are trying to read that sentence but that’s not the way to read it.
This is the only proper way to read this sentence ;) Explain to me either which other sentence you are basing your 'WotC uses OGC' on, or explain to me what the 'of' is doing there in 'Derivative Material of Open Game Content' (you seem to treat it like an 'or', which it is not)
 
Last edited:

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top