OGL Questions About "Grey Area"

[Storyteller Hero]

Incredibly bad advice.

1.) 4E was not released under the OGL.

2.) That linked sample has no OGL attached to it and even at a glance makes obvious errors that wouldn't be allowed under the OGL like using the term Dungeon Master, etc.

3.) We have no idea if the supplement whence that sample came is under license of any kind.

4.) The OGL has specific language about compatibility claims.

5.) For some time, Kenzer had a special legal situation (perhaps a license) that allowed them to do things in relation to D&D that no other company could based on, from my understanding, the use of some of their IP.

All in all I would avoid any advice that suggests you should follow your understanding of the example of another in a legal matter, just doing what they do, as there are any number of ways in which that is horrible advice. In this case I have pointed out five with only a glance.

Actually the point was that one can state compatibility with another product without a license. Kenzer made a big hubbub about it back in the day.

To quote:

"Correct, we no longer have an agreement with Wizards. Why? Is there some "magic" restriction in IP law that restricts people from making new creative material that doesn't use any TMs, patents or copyrights of another company?

Oh, perhaps it's the magical FUD rule that you're referring to?

By-the-by, KoK first appeared in 1994 and we had no formal relationship with TSR."

"that is not copyright infringement.

copyright infringement is basing your work on someone else's creative expression. Rules are not creative expression. Also, it is not "based" on their rules. It happens to "work with" their rules.

SHould every programmer that writes a program that works with a computer have to pay the owner of the OS it runs on? I think not. I could be wrong, but fortunately, the US and International copyright laws agree with me.

A world where one could not reference others' materials in their product would be a dark and sad place."


http://www.kenzerco.com/forums/showthread.php?38336-Kalamar-4th-Edition&p=678175#post678175


Considering the fact that there was no litigation from WotC, no take-down notices, etc., and the laws themselves one can read from the official Copyright Office site, it's doable.

Just don't do it under the OGL - this also means no direct copy-paste or trademarks. You can use the same rules mechanics under different wording than that which is copyrighted. You can't use copyrighted fluff such as illithid or drow.

 

[Mark CMG]

(. . .)

Still bad advice. No one knows what David Kenzer knows: his reasons, his situation, or his agreements and understandings with WotC. In all likelihood, something he does might go unchallenged but bring WotC down on another, given Kenzer's history with WotC. Furthermore, the OGL provides safe harbor for using OGC that isn't covered while not using it. While one, perhaps, gives up the right to claim compatibility (there's no telling how any given such claim would be received), one gives up so much more not using the OGL.

There are dozens and dozens of ways to go astray of copyright and trademark law when putting out something meant to be compatible with D&D sans OGL, only some of which have to do with running afoul of WotC. There are now scores of companies who have OGC out there that might inadvertently find its way into a non-OGL work and without the OGL there are no provisions and remedies available aside from traditional legal means.

Imagine someone utilizing a term from an Adventure Path and treading unknowingly on Paizo's rights? What if a freelancer who is hired onto the team decides to re-develop something he wrote for someone else that has now become copyright of, say, Green Ronin? While some of those things might be handled by the breach and cure section of the OGL, without that to rely on one could find oneself in a horrible mess.

Simply looking over at Kenzer's method without any of Kenzer's personal knowledge and thinking that is something so easily emulated is not wise.

 

[Morrus]

Yes, you can indicate compatibility with something else as long as you don't do so in a way which misleads customers as to its third party nature. Makers of iPhone cases and chargers do it all the time.

The OGL requires you to give up that right in exchange for various things.

 

[Nellisir]

You can't use any PI terms (Dungeons & Dragons, D&D) in an OGL product. Most publishers refer to "3e" or "5e" as a workaround.

You can indicate compatibility with a trademarked term in a non-OGL work.

Your blog is not OGL.

Your book is OGL.

Also ask yourself, what percentage of your readers aren't going to recognize a term like 3e (or 5e)? It's probably a very small percentage. So you might as well just use the workaround from the beginning.