OGL and copyright

[Psion]

no, i think i got the answers i need. Perhaps i was wrong in thinking that because enworld does publish, that someone at enworld could help. anyway, I think whats going to happen is ism going to have to make my own classes to recreate some characters. thats fine. I was just wondering if anyone had knowledge offhand or if someone had made a module or something with npc that borrowed from classes not in the srd.

I think before I make new classes though, that i may ask wtc if using npcs build with other books, is ok. I realize the you cant copyright swashbuckler, but i also realize that wotc has a class and that class happens to be called swashbuckler and while the class is copyrighted, the term swashbuckler is not.

FWIW, there's a swashbuckler class in AEG's Swashbuckling Adventures; it's also available in pdf form. You might be able to make use of it pretty much as-is or with some modifications (though the book as a whole has a reputation of having many feats and classes not wholly suitable for core D&D).

 

[Moon-Lancer]

wait, so using aeg stuff is ok, but using wtc stuff is not? Why is using aeg stuff ok? is it becuse its based off the ogl?

 

[dcas]

wait, so using aeg stuff is ok, but using wtc stuff is not? Why is using aeg stuff ok? is it becuse its based off the ogl?

Any material derived from open game content (OGC) is itself open game content. You would have to look at the AEG book recommended, though, to determine which of AEG's material is OGC and which is not. That which is not could be covered under Product Identity or by standard copyright.

 

[Moon-Lancer]

ok, one last question

so i gave another look to the ogl and I saw this

"You agree not to indicate compatibility or co-adaptability with any Trademark or Registered Trademark in conjunction with a work containing Open Game Content except as expressly licensed in another, independent Agreement with the owner of such Trademark or Registered Trademark."

does this mean that I cannot say something to the effect of "dungeons and dragons 3.5", but I can say 'd20 3.5". My concern is that in some of the older d20 books, its sometimes hard to find what version of the ogl they used, and what rules it was written under.

and for the Aeg idea the ogl says this

"If You are contributing original material as Open Game Content, You represent that Your Contributions are Your original creation and/or You have sufficient rights to grant the rights conveyed by this License."

does that mean if i Make a class using the ogl i can copyrighted that class, or is it just the world thats copyrighted? it would seem to me that aeg's swashbuckler would be copyrighted

 

[TheAuldGrump]

wait, so using aeg stuff is ok, but using wtc stuff is not? Why is using aeg stuff ok? is it becuse its based off the ogl?

Essentially correct.

However, it is not unknown for companies to 'cripple' OGL material, for example making the game mechanics of a new character class Open Game Content (because they are required to) but not the class name. Sometimes this is because the material that is not OGC contains proper names that are unique to a setting (Scarred Lands for example has classes and creatures that use the names of the gods of the setting, which are White Wolf IP.)

When using material written by another company read carefully what is OGC and what is not. The aforementioned Swashbuckling Adventures is slightly weirder than most, it designates a fair amount of material as IP, then opens much of the IP for limited use, designating it 'Goodies'. So, you could use Reise's Scythe in an adventure, as long as you don't try to stat up Reise himself. (I used Section 15 of Swashbuckling adventures as a shopping list back a few years ago. ) So using the Swashbucker from SA is acceptable, but it is a very different class from the Complete Warrior class of the same name. Do not use the WotC class and try to palm it off as the SA version.

The easiest way to handle WotC material is to not use it. Put the books away, and do not even look at them when statting things out. This includes the Player's Handbook. Use the System Reference Document instead. Spell names, for example, can contain 'hidden' IP, such as Leomund's Tiny Hut, which is called just Tiny Hut in the SRD.

The Auld Grump

 

[Psion]

so i gave another look to the ogl and I saw this

"You agree not to indicate compatibility or co-adaptability with any Trademark or Registered Trademark in conjunction with a work containing Open Game Content except as expressly licensed in another, independent Agreement with the owner of such Trademark or Registered Trademark."

does this mean that I cannot say something to the effect of "dungeons and dragons 3.5", but I can say 'd20 3.5". My concern is that in some of the older d20 books, its sometimes hard to find what version of the ogl they used, and what rules it was written under.

Yes. However, there is another license called the D20 System Trademark License that does let you put a blurb on the front and use the d20 logo. But that is a different license with different conditions.

"If You are contributing original material as Open Game Content, You represent that Your Contributions are Your original creation and/or You have sufficient rights to grant the rights conveyed by this License."

does that mean if i Make a class using the ogl i can copyrighted that class, or is it just the world thats copyrighted? it would seem to me that aeg's swashbuckler would be copyrighted

The works (both AEG's and yours) ARE copyrighted. But, you agree anything you call open game content can be licensed to anyone else who cares to pick up your product and use it as described under the license. One of the conditions of the license is that you include the copyright statements of any work you use as a source.

I recommend you check out the OGL list for more information. Many such details are examined in great detail. If you are really interested in learning more, I suggest you check out the OGL FAQ here:
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/oglfaq/20040123f

and then check out the Open Gaming Foundation list servers for more detailed discussion:
http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/

 

[jmucchiello]

I agree that this isn't the place for seeking authoritative advice, but I disagree that this is something that shouldn't be discussed.

The question asked was interesting and relevant. If we restricted questions on these boards to those which could authoritatively be answered on these boards, we wouldn't have very many questions being asked.

And it has been asked literally thousands of times before. This is not the 2nd discussion here, it's the 2000th discussion here. Not counting the thousands of email messages from the ogl mailing lists. And the General forum is inappropriate for this discussion. It should be in the publishing forum.

wait, so using aeg stuff is ok, but using wtc stuff is not? Why is using aeg stuff ok? is it becuse its based off the ogl?

The AEG stuff has a copy of the OGL and it indicates what parts of the book are open content. Read it carefully to determine what can be used.

If you read the WotC's Player's Handbook, Dungeon Master's Guide and Monster Manuals you will find that there is no OGL content in them. So you cannot used material in them as open content. (That's why there is an SRD. It contains material WotC has licensed with the OGL. The core books do not.)

You should also prevail upon yourself to read your local copyright laws, especially those concerning derivative works as that is an important term in the OGL which is defined in the copyright code, not the license.

Confused yet? Want to know the best part about this? There are lawyers on the mailing list who even today disagree about some of the esoteric sections of the OGL. Good luck. And remember how much my advice is worth.

 

[Psion]

(child induced double post)

 

[Psion]

And it has been asked literally thousands of times before. This is not the 2nd discussion here, it's the 2000th discussion here.

And? Thread topics get revisited here all the time. It's an innocent query and not a topic the mods have cautioned against. There is nothing wrong with that.

 

[jmucchiello]

And? Thread topics get revisited here all the time. It's an innocent query and not a topic the mods have cautioned against. There is nothing wrong with that.

I was responding to:

Perhaps i was wrong in thinking that because enworld does publish, that someone at enworld could help.

and explaining why there aren't lots of people chiming in with helpful info. They've done it so many times before they expect others to carry the torch.

I am perhaps coming off a bit abrupt so I will apologize for that. Have to remember "we" were all OGL noobs once upon a time. (where we does not really refer to any of the other posters here specifically.)