Myrik Games following the Valar precedent?

[jmucchiello]

Phil, Most likely they have made the press release in ignorance than arrogance. I have sent them an email pointing out the sections of the licenses that they have failed to comply with and asked them to rectify the problem. I also pointed them at this thread so if they want to reply publicly, they now at least know who is looking for answers.

 

[philreed]

Phil, Most likely they have made the press release in ignorance than arrogance. I have sent them an email pointing out the sections of the licenses that they have failed to comply with and asked them to rectify the problem. I also pointed them at this thread so if they want to reply publicly, they now at least know who is looking for answers.

You're probably right. And it's quite cool of you to try and help them like that.

 

[jmucchiello]

You're probably right. And it's quite cool of you to try and help them like that.

Remind me of that again should they just dismiss me or tell me to mind my own business.

 

[EricNoah]

And sometimes what you think is a mistake might actually be a special arrangement with WotC. I'm not saying it is likely in this case, but sometimes when you see an oddity (like a company using closed material or whatever) it's not necessarily due to ignorance -- it's due to a special arrangement.

 

[Owen K.C. Stephens]

It's also just barely possible that this isn't an OGL product, but a game written under the assumption that you can't copyright rules, so a compatible product doesn't -need- the OGL or d20 license. In other words, a throwback to the days of Mayfair and Judge's Guild.

Now I doubt that, and I haven't bought the book. It may have the OGL in back like every other game designed to ride D&D's coattails. But I don't see a d20 on its cover, so I consider it at least possible. It might even be a test balloon, to see if WotC even notices a non-OGL game book. I find it interesting that it's at DriveThruRpg.com, which doesn't mostly have small-scale first-time publishers.

Owen K.C. Stephens

 

[The Sigil]

Now I doubt that, and I haven't bought the book. It may have the OGL in back like every other game designed to ride D&D's coattails. But I don't see a d20 on its cover, so I consider it at least possible.

Given that their website displays the following statement... which connotes that they are using the d20 license, since that's the boilerplate language that goes with it)...

Myrik Games products require the use of the Dungeons and Dragons 3rd Edition Player's Handbook, published by Wizards of the Coast.

AND also displays the d20 logo,

AND uses the terms "Dungeons and Dragons" and "Dungeon Master" to "advertise " their product (in the same "loose" lingo that is not "ad copy" per se but just a "description of the product/press release" - the supposed loophole Valar tried to leap through and got publicly slapped for),

they must either (a) have a separate agreement with WotC to use the terms "Dungeon Master" and "Dungeons and Dragons" or (b) they're simply a new PDF publisher in gross violation of the d20STL and OGL (possibly through ignorance, but in gross violation nonetheless).

Given that WotC hasn't even granted the "Big Boys" like SSS, Green Ronin, Mongoose, Malhavoc, and others the use of "Dungeons and Dragons" - Kalamar got it by getting a license prior to/concurrent with the advent of the d20 logo and NOBODY has gotten it since...

Ockham's razor suggests they are in gross violation of the OGL.

Now, not to be mean-spirited, but I hope WotC slaps them upside the head like they did with Valar and get them to tighten up their advertising... not because I dislike them, but because there are a hundred other companies out there that do "extra work" and diligently follow the d20STL/OGL guidelines, and it's really annoying to see someone who's too lazy/stupid/ignorant to do the (minimal) amount of extra work required to stay in compliance.

--The Sigil

 

[Mark]

Isn't this something for WotC to deal with?

 

[jmucchiello]

Isn't this something for WotC to deal with?

If it were you just starting out, would you prefer my friendly heads-up or the lawyer letter from WotC?

 

[Piratecat]

Isn't this something for WotC to deal with?

Sure, but I think it says great things about the industry that we're willing to self-monitor and police ourselves. As The Sigil says, hundreds of companies work their butts off to stay within the terms of WotC's licensing agreement; when someone doesn't, helping them tighten up advertising so that they conform as well just makes good sense.

Anyways, the book author is a long-time EN World member. It's nice to help take care of our own.

 

[Mark]

If it were you just starting out, would you prefer my friendly heads-up or the lawyer letter from WotC?

Heads up by email? Sure, maybe. Depends on the tone. Heads up by starting a thread or jumping into one publically to discuss someone else's potential contract violations? I'm not so sure that's necessary to achieve the stated goal of being helpful.

Sure, but I think it says great things about the industry that we're willing to self-monitor and police ourselves. As The Sigil says, hundreds of companies work their butts off to stay within the terms of WotC's licensing agreement; when someone doesn't, helping them tighten up advertising so that they conform as well just makes good sense.

Anyways, the book author is a long-time EN World member. It's nice to help take care of our own.

Self-monitor and police ourselves, in a publically viewable forum? Again, I'm not sure that is necessary to the stated goal of being helpful.

If someone wants to, as a third party, jump into a potential violation of a contract between two other parties I would think they would best do so privately. If they are in violation and someone only wishes to help them, then that is all that is necessary, IMO. If it turns out they are not in violation, then doing anything that is publically viewable is not only unnecessary but potentially and unduly harmful, perhaps to all three parties.