More info about this OSRIC thing?

[John Stark]

Mr. Dancey may be an OGL guru, but some of his "assertations" are incorrect.

To the extent that the charts of ability scores do not represent a non-linear mathmatical function (i.e., the figures are arbitrarily made up by the original writer) they're protected by copyright and can't be reused without permission.

To the extent that the class & racial limitations and individual power descriptions and level dependent abilities and game modifiers match those of AD&D (any edition) and are not the result of a simple linear mathematical function, those templates represent selection, arrangement and presentation copyrights inherent in AD&D and suffer the same limitations...

...The 'to hit' charts, to the extent that they represent non-linear functions, are protected by WotC copyright.

Game rules simply are not subject to copyright. You can't copyright "roll 3d6 to generate ability scores." You can't copyright "roll 2d6 and move your token X number of squares." You can't copyright "elves recieve a +1 bonus to attacks made with longswords."

Further, the "non-linear mathmatical function" standard that he asserts is also erroneous. It doesn't matter whether the rule or formula in a game is linear or non-linear. Neither are subject to copyright.

Spell names which are not OGC but are in AD&D and are "not obvious" (i.e. they contain some creative element) are copyright by WotC.

If OSRIC used any spell names that are not contained in the SRD, then Dancey might have a point. As far as I'm aware, OSRIC uses only spells that are in the SRD, so his point here is superfluous.

And even if the authors of OSRIC mistakenly used a spell name that was not in the SRD, its not a show stopper. Both Stuart Marshall and Matt Finch have both maintained that if there are any problems with anything they put into OSRIC in terms of trademarks or copyrights, that they would make the necessary changes. So, this point is a complete non-issue.

In summary: I wouldn't touch this without SERIOUS work to ensure everything I used was actually OGC.

I honestly have to wonder whether Dancey read OSRIC before he made these statements. The OSRIC authors have maintained since day one that those who are interested in using it and have questions about it absolutley must seek their own legal council and advice, and ensure for themselves that its "actually OGC." In fact, they state this quite clearly in the document itself. This statement by Dancey does nothing but affirm what the OSRIC authors have already stated in the document; to whit, talk to your own IP lawyer if you have issues about it.

 

[Blustar]

And to second you, Gary Gygax has confirmed this multiple times in correspondence.

So what was the precedent set by this case? Who won the case. If I remember correctly, didn't this case pretty much put Mythus's publisher out of business AND start TSR's precipitous downfall? ( both companies died!)

Do the owners of OSRIC reallty have that kind of cash to battle a company the size of WOTC/Hasbro?

With Mythus being so different from AD&D and still being taken to court, how is OSRIC going to avoid the same fate? They can claim all they want that it's all perfectly legal because our lawyers said it is but what happens when WOTC/Hasbro says it's not?


Why would Kenzer Co. go through all that hassle with their license when they could have just done what the OSRIC people are doing and publish everything compatible with OSRIC/AD&D and slap on their honor, crit tables, etc..? Why all the hassle? (the parody, authorization)


If there is such a market for "old school" gaming, why not buy the license for AD&D and make games for it again? Wouldn't you make all your money back after the resurgence and have products flying off the shelf?


Blue

ps- I hope I'm wrong but it just doesn't pass the smell test for me.

 

[dcas]

So what was the precedent set by this case? Who won the case. If I remember correctly, didn't this case pretty much put Mythus's publisher out of business AND start TSR's precipitous downfall? ( both companies died!)

No, GDW went out of business soon after for other reasons.

Why would Kenzer Co. go through all that hassle with their license when they could have just done what the OSRIC people are doing and publish everything compatible with OSRIC/AD&D and slap on their honor, crit tables, etc..? Why all the hassle? (the parody, authorization)

Probably because they did not grasp the full import of the OGL at the time.

If there is such a market for "old school" gaming, why not buy the license for AD&D and make games for it again? Wouldn't you make all your money back after the resurgence and have products flying off the shelf?

The point is that there probably isn't a large enough market to make buying the license for AD&D worthwhile.

 

[John Stark]

So what was the precedent set by this case? Who won the case. If I remember correctly, didn't this case pretty much put Mythus's publisher out of business AND start TSR's precipitous downfall? ( both companies died!)

Neither won the case, as it never went to court. It was settled out of court, with TSR paying through the nose to acquire the rights to Mythus. The dollar figure was never made public, but it was a pretty penny from all accounts. Not that it saved GDW by that point, or TSR for that matter. You are correct that both companies died thereafter, although its disputed whether it was because of the legal battle between them that ultimately sealed both their fates.

Why would Kenzer Co. go through all that hassle with their license when they could have just done what the OSRIC people are doing and publish everything compatible with OSRIC/AD&D and slap on their honor, crit tables, etc..? Why all the hassle? (the parody, authorization)

Kenzer had already acquired the license to AD&D (read: spent a wad of cash for it)before the OGL was finished. The Hackmaster PHB is copyright 2001, which means that it was already well into production before 2001, while the OGL wasn't finished until then. Kenzer couldn't have used the OGL because it didn't exist for them to do so when they were launching Hackmaster, and they probably would have gone ahead with their purchased AD&D license anyways since they had already paid for it.

EDIT: As an interesting aside, its been rumored that Kenzer is going to announce that its going the OGL route at some point in the not-to-distant future. Whether that's true or not, I don't know.

 

[Xyanthon]

I think for me what is so confusing about this is not so much the OSRIC system itself, but the whole OGL argument. Now, how can games like C&C exist under the OGL and a reference document such as OSRIC be something that isn't legal? Furthermore, even without OSRIC, why couldn't one make a module for 1e? Didn't Mayfair go through this back in the day and win in a suit with TSR?

Not trying to cause a fuss but I'm really unclear on the finer points of the legalities and what is and isn't allowed in the OGL. I think it'd be cool to produce stuff that is 1e compatable (mostly modules) and release them to the public and I fail to see why I couldn't do it with or withour referencing OSRIC (even though I think it is a good idea). So if anyone can clear this up for me a little bit, I'd appreciate it.

 

[trancejeremy]

Kenzer likely got the D&D/AD&D license as part of a settlement with WOTC over the use of KODT in the Dragon cd-rom collection. At least once ex-WOTCer has said that anyway, though he hasn't been completely reliable in the past.

Anyway, Mayfair and TSR sparred, but I believe Mayfair first came to an agreement with TSR, then several later TSR sued them mostly over trademarks and advertising that violated their agreement, but bought out the Role-Aids line. Which put an end to that.

So it's really never best tested in court, because basically it's always been TSR buying out the company they have problems with.

 

[John Stark]

Not trying to cause a fuss but I'm really unclear on the finer points of the legalities and what is and isn't allowed in the OGL.

When it comes to lawyer-speak, its easy to understand why the legalities involved aren't always clear, heh. You're certainly not alone in this.

I think it'd be cool to produce stuff that is 1e compatable (mostly modules) and release them to the public and I fail to see why I couldn't do it with or withour referencing OSRIC (even though I think it is a good idea). So if anyone can clear this up for me a little bit, I'd appreciate it.

IMO opinion, its entirely possible to publish something for certain out of print games using the OGL only, without reference to OSRIC at all.

Some of the advantages of using OSRIC might clarify the difference between using it and not:

OSRIC merely has already done the heavy lifting for you. They've provided the SRD terms and rules tweaked in such a way that they are become compatible with older games. The OSRIC writers have already dealt with the OGL issues and the SRD in such a way that they are confident that they are compliant with the terms of the OGL and have avoided infringing upon any trademarks or copyrights held by certain companies, and thus the work of dealing with rule conversions from the SRD (which is essentially a d20 system) to the older games is done already.

Also, if you publish under OSRIC, it provides legal cover for you in the sense that until some company comes along and issues a cease and desist order against it, they can't come after you for using OSRIC. In other words, they can't let OSRIC continue to be distributed while coming after you for using it to publish something. As long as OSRIC goes unsuccessfully challenged in court, publishers are protected. The OSRIC authors believe that they have worked in such a way that a legal challenge against it would lose, and they had several lawyers working with them to this effect.

Further, as I stated up thread, publishing via OSRIC provides free advertising for your own published work. The better known that OSRIC becomes, the more likely it is that your product will get hits from internet searches when people look for OSRIC products. Since the OSRIC authors require no royalties or payments for the use of OSRIC, you pay nothing for this free advertising. You can ride on the coat tails of the popularity of other OSRIC products, and the brand name, for free.

None of these reason I've given mean you must use OSRIC to publish stuff for older games. They are incentives only, and OSRIC is certainly not meant to be the "one game to rule them all." There may be other options for publishing old school material that you think are better, and since I know that Stuart Marshall and Matt Finch (the OSRIC authors) are gamers first and foremost, I'm sure they would not only wish you the best even if you decided OSRIC wasn't your cup of tea, but they would also most likely buy your product, if it was quality work, simply to support a fellow old school gamer and writer. They are more interested in jump starting a growth of old school gaming than they are in how it happens. They've simply offered one avenue to do this, and its free.

EDIT: There are probably other benefits I'm not thinking of in regards to using OSRIC. I'm having a bout of insomnia the past few days, which means I get a bit scatter brained, heh.

 

[John Stark]

Anyway, Mayfair and TSR sparred, but I believe Mayfair first came to an agreement with TSR, then several later TSR sued them mostly over trademarks and advertising that violated their agreement, but bought out the Role-Aids line. Which put an end to that.

So it's really never best tested in court, because basically it's always been TSR buying out the company they have problems with.

I don't think this is accurate. If memory serves, Mayfair won a court case against TSR over some of these very same issues. Let me try and dig that up for you, as I want to be sure of that before I say more.

 

[Blustar]

So what happens after OSRIC has been out for a couple of years then it gets challenged? Would all the infringing companies be required to pay royalties or destroy stock?

Why not just use C&C? It is for all intents and purposes 100% compatible with OAD&D? We ran Castle Zagig out of the box and I don't even have the PH or M&T for C&C. Wouldn't C&C be a safer bet? Doesn't C&C already fill the niche of a published set of rules compatible with AD&D?


Blue

 

[Xyanthon]

For me it's not so much a matter of using a system to play a game, but the ability to produce my own material and put it out there so other can use it or not. I already own every version of D&D since OD&D all the way through 3.5 plus C&C and several others. I love to write and do artwork so putting something together would be a creative release for me. Therefor, OSRIC appeals to me because I can put together a module under the 1e compatable rules and have people play it. I know I could do the same for 3.5 and release a d20 compatable release, but for me, the older system just caters better to my asthetic sensibilities (although I play and enjoy others, 1e is my favorite).