OGC Heredity

[Yair]

I distinctly remember Open Game Content to be hereditary, namely that material derived out of OGC must be OGC. But looking over the OGL, I can't seem to find solid support for this premise. Would someone be so kind as to point it (or my error) to me?

[Moderator: I'm not sure as to the right forum for this, so if it needs to be moved - move ahead, and I'm sorry.]

 

[Halivar]

Somebody tell Monte Cook.

Seriously, I don't think it's there.

 

[d20Dwarf]

I read the title of this thread and thought Mongoose was putting out a game about genetics.

 

[Umbran]

I distinctly remembering Open Game Content to be hereditary, namely that material derived out of OGC must be OGC.

I think it depends upon what you call "derived from". Once material is released under the OGL, it is OGL forever. Magic Missile is in the SRD. Even if someone takes it and uses it in their own products, it still remains OGC.

However, if you take OGC, and derive something from it that is similar to, but not exactly the same as the original, that may be a different matter.

Halivar, as for the Monte Cook comment, I'm not sure what you're talking about. If you look in the front of Arcana Unearthed, for example you'll see a whole lot of stuff noted as OGC, much of which comes from the SRD...

 

[PeterDonis]

I think sections 1 (g) and 2 of the license are the operative ones. Section 1 (g) says:

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

Section 2 then uses the term "Use" as just defined:

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 using this License.

So basically, if you create content derived from OGC, you are Using the OGC you derived from. If you Use any OGC, you have to affix the notice, and affixing the notice means the license applies to the content you affix it to (which means the content you derived from the OGC you Used).

This is just my interpretation, of course, and IANAL.

 

[Napftor]

I read the title of this thread and thought Mongoose was putting out a game about genetics.

LOL

Now, there's something that's sig worthy.

 

[The Sigil]

You missed section 1 (d) - emphasis mine:

(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.

It is clear in the license that if you create a derivative work from something that is Open Game Content, the resultant work must ALSO be Open Game Content.

However, since different folks have vastly different views on exactly what constitutes a "derivative work under copyright law," you see arguments about whether something that was/was not declared as OGC should not/should have been declared such.

--The Sigil

 

[Yair]

Thanks.

 

[the Jester]

Don't know where it's specified, but I believe that anything produced that uses the rules in the SRD must designate a certain % of the book as open content.

Could be wrong.

 

[Gez]

The Monte Cook comment is probably about crippled OGC. When the definitions of OGC, IP, and so are inextricably complicated so as to make the whole work unusable without a dozen of pounds of Aspirin and a full team of lawyers. It's a criticism that have been made about Monte before.