[OGL Questions] Is Dungeons and Dragons a game?

[jmucchiello]

Im not agianst using the OGL but from what I read it seems to require an attempt at copyright to even use it. I am not trying to copyright my game.

See that quote right there. You copyrighted it. You did. We all saw you do it. As soon as you expressed an idea in a fixed medium you created a copyrighted work. Congratulations. Likewise as soon as you right your system out in words it too will be copyrighted. Just because it is composed of game systems does not stop the words placed in order by their creator from retaining a copyright on those words.

Unless the work is a derivative work of someone else's copyrighted material. The expression of classed fantasy avatars having strength, dexterity, constitution, etc and armor class and hit dice and hit points and bab and all these terms in the combination D&D has them is copyrighted by WotC. If your work has similar terms used in the same combination, you MIGHT have a derivative work on your hands. Only a JUDGE can determine this. No one else can say for sure, not even a lawyer you might hire.

This fundamental principle of copyright is where you start to go wrong.

 

[JPL]

But I can understand that people are curious about them

People always stop and look at a train wreck, CD.

To restate my previous point . . . as an attorney, I think the issue here is not whether your interpretation of IP/copyright law is correct...it's whether it makes more sense to use the OGL or to risk legal action which will be a massive headache for you.

 

[jmucchiello]

The OGL does not require you to assert copyright over anything you write.

Um, yes it does because you need to say you own it in order to prove that you can contribute to the body of OGC. Don't confuse things.

 

[barsoomcore]

Hey, JPL, good to see you.

Wow, was that TWO trains head-on? One of them looks like it was a passenger train, don't you think? And what's that say on the side of the other train? "Flammable"? "Contents Under Pressure"? "Keep Away From Small Children"?

You know, I'm just going to step back a few hundred yards...

 

[Chaos Disciple]

People always stop and look at a train wreck, CD.

To restate my previous point . . . as an attorney, I think the issue here is not whether your interpretation of IP/copyright law is correct...it's whether it makes more sense to use the OGL or to risk legal action which will be a massive headache for you.

Im pretty sure if I dont copyright my material it does not qualify for the OGL so I dont see any problems with lawyers yet

 

[Fifth Element]

On the other hand....

I have often wanted to roleplay a fight between a microscopic organism and a planet.

I expect it would look something like Chaos Disciple v. WotC.

 

[bodhi]

My ideas are not some kind of game supplement produced by an indie publisher they are basically just ideas and therefore cant be copyrigthted and for this reason might not even qualify for the OGL.

1) You're contemplating a document that's an expansion to the D20 rules, yet is not a "game supplement"?
Edit: The fact that you're not a commercial "indie publisher" makes no difference, at least as far as copyright is concerned. Your wrote it, it's your copyright.

2) Your ideas cannot be copyrighted. However, once you express them, the expression is copyrighted. And the same is true for WotC. The mechanic of die roll + modifiers vs target number is not copyrightable. The explicit expression in the "Core Mechanic" section of the SRD is.

To turn it around, why not use it if it might save you legal problems. Even if you're right, can you afford the court costs you'll incur in proving you're right? It's insurance, pure and simple.

QFT. "Why do I need insurance? It's expensive, and I'm a good driver."

Use the OGL and OGC (correctly), you're covered. Deliberately ignore the OGL, and skirt the gray area of what (specifically) is copyrightable or not, and attempt to hide your identity, and that's an argument against you.

 

[jmucchiello]

I would like to point out agian this is an collection of systems which can not be subject to copyrights.

You keep saying this and we keep telling you you are wrong.

You might not be very familar with game design but I dont have any problem determining systems and methods from names and text.

Amazing. The whole point of the OGL is that determining systems and methods from names and text is a murky completely arbitrary and completely unknown entity that the OGL frees you from doing by telling you what WotC considers the dividing line. Such a dividing line is still arbitrary but it's the line which you can approach safely without fear of being sued by WotC. Cross it and you need to convince a Judge that your are right and they are wrong.

I am also unsure if this infornation even qualifies for the OGL

True, it only does if you use the OGL. If you don't only normal copyright law applies. Read JPL's posts to see how scared that should make you.

I seriously doubt I could or would sue WotC because like I told scott its intended for public use so they wont have to worry

Words fail me. Scott does not think you might sue WotC. He thinks he may have to call legal and have them find you. The OGL doesn't protect WotC from anything. It protects you from them by telling you were the line you should not cross is. Cross it and they might decide to sue your for it.

 

[jmucchiello]

Im pretty sure if I dont copyright my material it does not qualify for the OGL

Then I guess you won't be writing those ideas down. Because if you do you will have copyrighted them. Did you miss that at the copyright office's website?

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Your ideas cannot be copyrighted. However, once you express them, the expression is copyrighted.

Yes, but he's out-smarted you there: He hasn't actually WRITTEN anything, so therefore, nothing has been expressed, and thus it's not copyrighted, and thus, he can't be sued for the creation of his not-supplement that he has not done.

See, he was right: No one really understands what he's doing.