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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Janx" data-source="post: 3015425" data-attributes="member: 8835">Too many things to say.... I'll start here:IF WotC got hostile, all they have to do is issue a Take Down order to your ISP. (see link explaining legal bits): <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OCILLA" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OCILLA</a>A TakeDown order would surely take the bounce out of OSRIC's bungee.  And they're ridiculously easy to give (with the hard work going to get it restored).Dancy's argument seems to be saying that the decision to grant a +4 to-hit bonus for having an 18 score (sorry, I forget the 1E table) was not mathematically deterministic (and thus not a process subject to patent law).  And that therefore that would be copyrightable.It seems that the OGL might still protect rules that state if you have X, then you get Y (per other's posts, IANAL).  Additonally, these types of statements sound like rules, and rules aren't patentable.  At best WotC could sue if the same wording of "if you have 18 strength, you get +4 to-hit" that appears in the 1E books.  Things would have been different if TSR patented the concept of ability scores and bonuses...which is what the inventer of Chess would have had to do to protect the concept of piece transformation (pawn to queen) per reaching a predetermined objective.Since WotC has given license to use the terms (Strength for instance), they can't sue for having Strength scores in OSRIC.  If saying 18 Strength grants a +4 to-hit bonus is protected for being a rule (not copyrightable), than OSRIC seems like it would win.The biggest risk, is that IF WotC chose to sue, they could tie up OSRIC in courts until the OSRIC folks run out of money (assuming WotC has deeper pockets).  This is despite the rightness of OSRIC's case.  It's just a matter of lawyers and time wasting.Now one interesting side effect of OSRIC, is that it and C&C are both targetting "old school gamers" and "those who want simplified D&D" to some extent.  C&C has a higher barrier to entry to use it than OSRIC.  Therefore, publishers interested in this nice will be more likely to use OSRIC than C&C.  That has an interesting economic twist on things.Now another interesting variable.  WotC is heavily invested in D20.  It wins when people use its rules.  It has little interest in alternatives to its product, even ones that diverge from the common d20 base (which relies on PH sales).  So WotC has more to gain by NOT licensing its older engines (unless it chose to publish older engine products, such as reprinting material).  Even then, reprints of 1E stuff may detract from 3e sales. The big problem TSR had was too much diversity of product (too many titles).  Keeping a tight rein on control and product line has been key to WotC's success.  My guess, is WotC will enjoy the free money from re-releasing existing 1e stuff (PDF probably).  If OSRIC seems problematic to them, they will send the lawyers (who are paid retainers, and have nothing better to prove the value of those retainers than to find people to sue).  Otherwise, OSRIC is a clever pathway to support old-school gaming, cheaper for other publishers.  The odd thing is that the owners of OSRIC don't seem to be gaining monetarily from this, though it has likely cost them money to do this.</blockquote>

Verification