OGC Reuse Value

[JoeGKushner]

One of the things mentioned in the OGC debates is that some don't want to open everything because they don't want someone to come along and recompile-rerelease their material.

Now I haven't seen this happen yet with any of the books that are OGC. I've seen bits and pieces, but never a whole book.

My question then, is if another publisher took your whole OGC book, redid the art and layout so that it was superior to yours (say hardcover full color illos and great layout, etc...), would you have any right to be upset it people then stood up and took notice of the work that they passed over in your product?

Some companies like Green Ronin do their Pocket books bare bones and that's great because for the most part, they're references and they do the job they set out to. Some others like the Mongoose Ultimate books aren't my particular cup of tea due to layout and resued art issues but I haven't seen any publisher do something that would make the OGC fears come true.

 

[Nellisir]

No, though it'd be...odd. I'd be mostly flattered, I think, with a little bit of "that's mine" irritation. People who are really interested could find the original through the S.15.

Credits above and beyond the S.15 would become an issue, though. If I reprint Bastion Press's Faeries...do I identify Bryon as the author? What about the editor?

Bastion Press may be a bad example, since it identifies everything but the artwork & graphical elements as OGC, presumably including the Credits, but I rather doubt somone's name can be designated OGC.

Random thoughts
Nell.

 

[jgbrowning]

One thing that annoys me about the OGL is the lack of indicating original source due the lack of clairity used in indicating OGC material.

example: Mongoose makes up a spell, Bastion uses it, then Green Ronin gets it from Bastion. *this is just an example*

Unless Bastion clearly indicated what bits they used that were mongoose's.. *say like under the spell they said This came from the quintisential squid book* when Green Ronin does their section 15 they can only indicated Bastion.

I think any used OGC should be clearly indicated as to where it came from. The reason being is that resuing OGC should help increase interest in the company that created it in exchange for allowing the company that used it, to use it.

But this is just my opinion. I also wish they would have made all spell names, feats names, and monster names OGC just like the mechanics involved. *shrug*

Now to answer your question.. I'd be a bit miffed if they hadn't told be beforehand even though I've agreed to what they're doing by using the OGL. I'd like to be told beforehand so I can express to them how if they could help me get some money by what they're doing. Even if that is simply saying (somewhre a bit more accesable to the average gamer than just the 15) that their book is basically a reprint of mine.

I think one of the purposes of the OGL and OGC is to promote a cooperative business model as opposed to a solely competative one. I think there would be ways they could sell their book, while at the same time providing me additional sales at no cost to themselves.

This is hindered when companies don't indicate clearly what in their book is re-used OGC and where that particular piece of OGC came from. IE. the people who wrote the stuff can end up not getting credit for it while someone who just used the stuff ends up with the benefits of the OGC someone else wrote. If the OGC had to be clearly indicated, I think it would help ease some people's disires to PI spell names, monsters, and feats.

joe b.

 

[jmucchiello]

One thing that annoys me about the OGL is the lack of indicating original source due the lack of clairity used in indicating OGC material.

How would you word that in the license without losing the "cannot use Trademarks without permission" clause? Without that clause there are a lot of people who would not come on board the OGL train.

 

[jgbrowning]

How would you word that in the license without losing the "cannot use Trademarks without permission" clause? Without that clause there are a lot of people who would not come on board the OGL train.

"cannot use Trademarks without permission except for the sole use of indicating the original source of OGC. Such indication of source must occur adjacent to the OGC said source is refferencing."

Extended legalese to show that you can't use it in advertising, press releases, blah blah... you can only use it when referencing the original source of the OGC... can't be used on the covers *even if for some reason the covers contain OGC*. Also have "the use of a Trademark for OGC reference is not a challange... blah blah"

I'm sure a real lawyer could work it out in a single paragraph, perhaps two.

joe b.

 

[Staffan]

example: Mongoose makes up a spell, Bastion uses it, then Green Ronin gets it from Bastion. *this is just an example*

Unless Bastion clearly indicated what bits they used that were mongoose's.. *say like under the spell they said This came from the quintisential squid book* when Green Ronin does their section 15 they can only indicated Bastion.

Eh... as I understand it, if you use the OGC from another book, you must include all the entries from that book's section 15. So, let's say Mongoose's "Quintessential Wizard" has a section 15 that looks like this:
"System Reference Document (c) 2000 WOTC blah blah.
Quintessential Wizard (c) 2002 Mongoose blah blah."

Then Bastion sees a cool spell in QW and want to use it in their Arena sourcebook for Oathbound. Their S15 would look like:
"SRD blah blah
Quintessential Wizard (c) 2002 Mongoose blah blah
Oathbound (c) 2002 Bastion Press
Arena (c) 2003 Bastion Press"

Let's say that even later, Clark Peterson sees a feat in Arena that he wants to use in Necromancer's next adventure. That S15 would look like:
"SRD blah blah
Quintessential Wizard blah blah
Oathbound blah blah
Arena blah blah
Return to the Temple of the Ninja (c) 2004 Clark Peterson blah blah"

Even though RTON doesn't use the spell Bastion included from QW in the Arena book, it must still reference QW in its section 15, since he used something from another book that mentioned it in the S15.

 

[Nellisir]

Eh... as I understand it, if you use the OGC from another book, you must include all the entries from that book's section 15. So,

That's certainly my understanding. You have to include the Copyright Notice of any OGC you distribute. S.15 is the "Copyright Notice". You have to reproduce the entirety of that S.15, whether or not it is relevant, exactly because the origin of each item of OGC is not indicated, and OGC may have been combined. In certain cases, this isn't actually too bad -- since you don't need to duplicate copyright notices, utilizing material from one source can open up others without extending your S.15 (not that it takes up -that- much space anyways).

Origin of OGC could be clearly indicated, without infringing on copyright, by numbering the Copyright notices in Section 15. A brief note at the beginning of the section or book could direct interested readers to the S.15, something like this:

"This compendium of spells was assembled from a variety of sources. Each spell is marked with a number (1). Please refer to Section 15 of the Open Game License (conviently found on page 65 of this book) if you are interested in determining the spell's source."

The spell entry would be exactly the same as usual, except for a superscript-style number after each spell name:

Fireball (1)
blah blah blah

Fizil's Frelling Fries (3)
blah blah blah

And finally, Section 15 would look like this:

15. COPYRIGHT NOTICE
0- Open Game License v 1.0a Copyright 2000, Wizards of the Coast, INc.
1- System Reference Document, Copyright 2000, Wizards of the Coast, Inc.; Authors Jonathan Tweet, Monte Cook, Skip Williams, based on original material by E. Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson.
2- Thee Compleat Librum ov Gar'Udok's Necromantic Artes, Copyright 2002, Ambient Inc.; Authors M Jason Parent, Denise Robinson, Chester Douglas II
3- Fizil's Fabulous Farscape Folio, Copyright 2003, Too Damned Bad It Got Cancelled Press; Authors B. R. Ing, I. T. Back, S. Oon.

etc, etc.

As always, I'm Not A Lawyer, and I haven't scrutinized the OGL to see if it would restrict this, but...you aren't using trademarked names anywhere but where you're supposed to, it's almost free advertising, it's convenient, and it's fairly unobtrusive.

Cheers
Nell.

 

[jgbrowning]

Eh... as I understand it, if you use the OGC from another book, you must include all the entries from that book's section 15. So, let's say Mongoose's "Quintessential Wizard" has a section 15 that looks like this:
"System Reference Document (c) 2000 WOTC blah blah.
Quintessential Wizard (c) 2002 Mongoose blah blah."

yes of course, your right. i don't know what i was smoking.

sorry for the confusion.

edit: actually now i remember what i was thinking You don't have to include the entire section 15, but you have to include the section 15 parts for the OGC you distribute. Since its hard to tell what's from what, the only way to be sure is to copy the whole thing. I least i wasn't completely losing my mind...

joe b.

 

[jgbrowning]

double post

joe b.

 

[jmucchiello]

You don't have to include the entire section 15, but you have to include the section 15 parts for the OGC you distribute. Since its hard to tell what's from what, the only way to be sure is to copy the whole thing.

No, "You must update the COPYRIGHT NOTICE portion of this License to include the exact text of the COPYRIGHT NOTICE of any Open Game Content " That means anything in Section 15 of the book you find that one feat in, must be duplicated in your Section 15. Now, if you can find another book with the same feat with an earlier, different Section 15, you can reference that. Just like the Netbook of Feats folk provide individual releases of the feats so you would not have to duplicate the entire Section 15 of the netbook just to access one feat.