Is the Unearthed Arcana SRD online?

[Cergorach]

Let's do a hypothetical. If WotC published an unlocked PDF version of Unearthed Arcana and charged $34.95 for it, would you support making or distributing a 100% OGC identical free version? The only "enhancement" would be the reduction of price.

You can't distribute the entire pdf, because that's not OGC, the designated text is. So you could copy all the text that's designated OGC and create a new pdf with your 'own' layout and fonts that you can legally use. Then it's legal.

"enhancement" is simple, by creating bookmarks and links in the document it's pretty much an "enhancement".

If WotC or any other OGL company suddenly threw a fit because someone is copying OGC, they are a bit late, it's been going on since the release of the original SRD years ago. I would assume that, that in itself, is proof enough that it's allright to copy designated OGC text verbatim.

It wouldn't suprise me if someone would pick up the SCO sword up and started shouting that the OGL is against the American Constitution and a danger to kapitalism...

A correllary might be converting a VHS tape to DVD. I think Star Wars is better to WATCH on DVD, but I don't think it changes the movie. Same plot, same characters, same effects, same lines, same content.

Good example, VHS vs. DVD. If it would mean that the subtitles could be turned on and off, it would definately mean an "enhancement" to me, that's the reason why i went for DVDs in the first place. No more annoying and distracting dutch subtitles for me, but the rest of the family can't watch a bloody english movie without subtitles. Not to mention the chapters that 95% of the DVDs have...

 

[Tav_Behemoth]

That's not true, for D&D 3E also the splat books and the psionics handbook where OCRed, as well as rule parts of the FRCS. Guardians of Order have also made a couple of SRDs available of matrial that's also in their print books.

My comrade from Amsterdam's point is well taken. The Guardians of Order's Anime SRD as well as Gold Rush Games' Action! System SRD are both freely accessible on the web in electronic text form (see http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/index.html). And I certainly shouldn't have forgotten our own Bendris Noulg's Aedon open gaming project; make sure to list it at the Foundation when it's out of beta, Bendris!

The case of WOTC's splat books clarifies that popularity is the main factor in whether something is opened up by users, or "text hacked". My definition of text hacking is scanning, OCRing, and sharing something in a form that's readable by people; I'm considering releasing OGC in a machine-readable form, for use with PCGen etc., to be a separate phenomenon.

The PHB, DMG, and MM contain mostly OGC that was also freely released on the Web. The UA contains mostly OGC that was only released as part of the inaccessible print book. The splat books contain no OGC and also had a print-only release. Despite these differences, what these have in common is that someone cared enough to hack their text. In the case of the core books, this is a pirate activity, since copyrighted art etc. is included in the files that are being distributed. In the case of the UA, the OGL makes the text-hacking legal so long as the scanners nobly put in the extra effort to strip away all copyrighted material/PI from the OCRed text before sharing the fruits of their labor.

Even though all d20 releases contain some OGC, and some open content has been made freely available as SRDs, as far as I know no third-party release has been popular enough to inspire text hacking of the print book or customization of the free SRD.

A good example of how popularity can trump all other factors is that the Bible is far and away the most consistently profitable book in the history of publishing, despite the fact that no one holds any copyright to its contents and people have been giving away free Bibles for hundreds of years. Ryan Dancey correctly predicted that the open gaming movement would turn core D&D into the Bible of the gaming world.

I think it's also true that:
1) Open games, especially those whose texts are easily accessible, will be more popular than games that do not have open licenses and are available only in print.
2) Community efforts that are open and licensed will be more successful than those that are shadowy and illegal; the work of the local UA team, like the customized SRDs at http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/, will be better designed and nicer to use than any pirate text-hack which violates the copyright of its source.

 

[Nellisir]

You can't distribute the entire pdf, because that's not OGC, the designated text is. So you could copy all the text that's designated OGC and create a new pdf with your 'own' layout and fonts that you can legally use.

As I said, "100% OGC identical" -- 100% of the OGC is identical. Naturally you can't copy the PI portions -- those aren't OGC. For purposes of this discussion, PI is utterly and irrevocably irrelevant -- it doesn't exist. Lets move past that.

Then it's legal.

"enhancement" is simple, by creating bookmarks and links in the document it's pretty much an "enhancement".

You've enhanced the presentation, not the content itself. You've made NO change to the content.

Remove the reader from the picture. Look at the content outside of its presentation, or if that's too hard, consider it as a plain text file. If it's 100% identical, it's not enhanced.

If WotC or any other OGL company suddenly threw a fit because someone is copying OGC, they are a bit late, it's been going on since the release of the original SRD years ago. I would assume that, that in itself, is proof enough that it's allright to copy designated OGC text verbatim.

You're reading too much into this. If I take, verbatim, 100% of the OGC content from Product X (totaling 200 pages) and add a one paragraph OGC example of how to use said content, I've enhanced the OGC and am legal to use it. It's that simple. The license clearly states you can copy Open Game Content...but as far as you're concerned, its not OGC unless you enhance it over the "prior art"

It wouldn't suprise me if someone would pick up the SCO sword up and started shouting that the OGL is against the American Constitution and a danger to kapitalism...

No idea what the SCO is; don't much care. I think the OGL is great. I also think if you're going to use it, it should be used according to the letter of the license, and the letter says it's not OGC unless it's an enhancement over the prior art.

Good example, VHS vs. DVD. If it would mean that the subtitles could be turned on and off, it would definately mean an "enhancement" to me, that's the reason why i went for DVDs in the first place. No more annoying and distracting dutch subtitles for me, but the rest of the family can't watch a bloody english movie without subtitles. Not to mention the chapters that 95% of the DVDs have...

Same movie. More convenient for you to watch, but same movie. No change to the content. Same gift, different bow.

The go-around to this is so incredibly simple, it's laughable. Add something. Make a contribution. THAT'S the point of the OGL -- to force people to add something to the body of OGC.

Cheers
Nell.

 

[Bendris Noulg]

Actually, Nell, I think you are focusing on part of a definition; One that supports your views when taken out of context.

For instance, consider Section 1g of the OGL which states:

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

Relevant Opinion: "Copy" is considered a form of OGC use.

Compare that with the full listing of Section 1d:

"Open Game Content" means the game mechanic and includes the methods, procedures, processes and routines to the extent such content does not embody Product Identity and is in enhancement over the prior art and any additional content clearly identified as Open Game Content by the Contributor, and means any work covered by this License, including translations and derivative works under copyright law, but specifically excludes Product Identity.

Relevant Opinion: Everything after "game mechanic" is in reference to conditions that may or may not apply to a specific piece of OGC.

Then we look at Section 2:

The License: This License applies to any Open Game Content that contains a notice indicating that the Open Game Content may only be Used under and in terms of this License. You must affix such a notice to any Open Game Content that you Use. No terms may be added to or subtracted from this License except as described by the License itself. No other terms or conditions may be applied to any Open Game Content distributed to this License.

Relevant Opinion: The bolded sentance is in direct relation to the "use" of OGC by the end-user, with "use" being defined in 1g and includes the act of "copying" the OGC.

I would argue that the inclusion of the term "copy" within the definition of "Use" would qualify a project such as an UA-SRD as legal and justified. It's also necessary, else things such as the Prometheus SRD, the BESM SRD, d20Exchange, and other SRD-formating projects (such as those handy pdfs!) would be in violation of the license*. Also consider products like Necromancer's Necropolis which contains spells from Relics & Rituals. Because these spells have not in any way or manner been altered, their inclusion would not qualify as an "enhancement" and would therefore be an OGL violation. Following your reasoning, it becomes impossible to re-use any OGC without making some sort of alteration to the material which, in my view, makes it impossible to the "hope" of Open Gaming (that the best of the best will float to the top of the barrel) to ever become a reality because the best must be changed in order to be re-used.

* I don't include the Action! SRD because it's a different system than d20 and as such would be considered the "originating" distribution. However, anything created based off of the Action! system would equally qualify in the above list.

 

[Cergorach]

You've enhanced the presentation, not the content itself. You've made NO change to the content.

Depends on your definition of content.

content
# Something contained, as in a receptacle.
# The subject matter of a written work, such as a book or magazine.

I could say that the receptable is the pdf, and the bookmarks/links are content of the pdf receptable.

Remove the reader from the picture. Look at the content outside of its presentation, or if that's too hard, consider it as a plain text file. If it's 100% identical, it's not enhanced.

The OGL doesn't actually say that OGC needs to be "enhanced" to be considerd OGC, if you quote an important part of the OGL, quote it well.

(d)”Open Game Content” means the game mechanic and includes the methods, procedures, processes and routines to the extent such content does not embody the Product Identity and is an enhancement over the prior art and any additional content clearly identified as Open Game Content by the Contributor, and means any work covered by this License, including translations and derivative works under copyright law, but specifically excludes Product Identity.

You kind of forgot the bolded part.

My OGC contibution will be:

This product has been "enhanced"...

*grins evily*

 

[jeffh]

That's not true, for D&D 3E also the splat books and the psionics handbook where OCRed, as well as rule parts of the FRCS.
Guardians of Order have also made a couple of SRDs available of matrial that's also in their print books.

I've seen an OCRed version of Monte Cook's Arcana Unearthed, too. In fact, I have it. (I also have a legitimate copy of the book, which I bought at full retail price the day it came out, in case anyone's inclined to have a hissy fit over that.) Just to make it clear, this is not a repackaging of the three PDFs of parts of the book that Malhavoc released, it is the entire book including the sections that appear in none of the three legitimate PDFs, OCRed with selectable text, including occasional obvious OCR errors but on the whole done very well.

It's been very handy for making the "Player's Handbook" for my next game, which will owe as much or more to MCAU than to standard D&D - for example, only about five PH classes will appear in it, but all the AU classes except the Oathsworn will be available, either as classes in their own right, or optional additions to classes via the Track system from Throwing Dice Games' Character Customization. (For example, a "Warmain track" wherein a Fighter can give up some bonus Feats for the distinctive abilities of the Warmain class). Anything that makes it easier for me to write this up is okay in my book, especially since I did pay full retail for the book once already!

 

[Nellisir]

My OGC contibution will be: "This product has been "enhanced"..."
*grins evily*

Like I said, the go-around is fantastically simple. That really wouldn't bother me a bit.

Cheers
Nell.
Who'll get to the rest of it later.

 

[nikolai]

People wanted to develop an online SRD of Unearthed Arcana material because it was open content... The fact that this could impact the sales of the book seems pretty freaking obvious to me.

I'm really not sure it would impact sales (though it obviously could). An electronic file isn't the same things as a book. It'd (likely) be cheaper to buy the book than to print the file out. To venture some (possibly incorrect) opinions: most D&Der probably haven't ever been to the WotC site, let alone know where to go on the 'net to get various online d20 stuff. It is within the realm of possibility that online copies may not damage sales. WotC does seem very relaxed about this, with the UA OGC and much of the contents of the recently released Map Folio being freely available on the website (and similar maps also being available all over the 'net).

I just want to stress that the impact of electronic copies on sales may be unclear and/or debatable.

 

[Wasgo]

I think the OGC in UA is fair game if you add something to it, but converting to electronic text and distributing for free isn't "an enhancement over the prior art"; you've actually made NO change to the prior art. You've merely altered its means of transmission. And if you haven't enhanced the "prior art", then it's not OGC and you can't distribute it.

I think you've drastically misunderstood the license here.

"Open Game Content" means the game mechanic and includes the methods, procedures, processes and routines to the extent such content does not embody the Product Identity and is an enhancement over the prior art and any additional content clearly identified as Open Game Content by the Contributor, and means any work covered by this License, including translations and derivative works under copyright law, but specifically excludes Product Identity.

This means that there are two types of OGC. The types that the publisher says are OGC, and things that modify existing OGC. Once it becomes OGC, such as the declaration at the start of the book, nothing will make it become no longer OGC. The point of this clause is that you can't modify existing OGC and declare that it is closed. Moreover, it means that all things like stat blocks, or other uses of WotC material is automatically OGC. It doesn't apply to the use of OGC in any way shape or form.

 

[Nellisir]

Everyone is right but me

ARGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I'VE JUST LOST ANOTHER HOUR TYPING ANOTHER LOST MESSAGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

1 - Everyone is right, I am wrong. Cergorach identified the phrase I somehow stupidly missed every time i read the license.

2 - Bendris - you are right, I am wrong, but you've misinterpreted my reasoning and the consequences thereof. However, I've just spent an hour explaining why, and it's gone, so screw it. The core of my argument is wrong, and ergo the consequences are meaningless.

Cheers all
Nell.

After 2 years on ENWorld, I've somehow managed to hit the wrong button 4 times in 24 hours and lose 4 posts and about 3 hours. Frustrated is not quite the word.