Yaarel
🇮🇱 🇺🇦 He-Mage
The genie might be out of the bottle?
A thoughtful policy from WotC for indies and other fans would be welcome, for how to use the term "D&D" responsibly.
D&D (2024) Some Terms Removed From 2024 SRD... But Is 'D&D' Really Supposed To Be In There?
- Thread starter Morrus
- Start date
A thoughtful policy from WotC for indies and other fans would be welcome, for how to use the term "D&D" responsibly.
Sacrosanct
Legend
Sacrosanct
Legend
And I would prefer the knight be called a knight instead of another Iron Golem, but here we are!
That's not the text of the Creative Commons License, no. That's a request WotC put at the start of the SRD.
The CC says you must include appropriate credit in the form requested, but it doesn't say you can't also include other things. In fact the license says you can't place any additional restrictions on the licensee.
Ah, hang on--
Licensors may request removal of attribution
In the 4.0 licenses, a user must remove attribution from a work at the creator's request to the extent it is reasonably practicable to do so.
In the 4.0 licenses, a user must remove attribution from a work at the creator's request to the extent it is reasonably practicable to do so.
I'm not sure how that interacts exactly.
Shardstone
Hero
Honestly, yes, but lots of people are afraid of it even though it isn't something to be afraid of.
Chaltab
Legend
The point of a Trademark is to prevent people from profiting off you brand's good name and reputation. WOTC can bring a trademark case against you if you use D&D in a way they don't approve of...
Whether they would for just using it on a compatibility page is another story. Doesn't seem worth it, but then Nintendo was petty enough to sue a supermarket for using the name Super Mario. (They lost that one)
Whether they would for just using it on a compatibility page is another story. Doesn't seem worth it, but then Nintendo was petty enough to sue a supermarket for using the name Super Mario. (They lost that one)
WinningerR
Adventurer
(The usual disclaimer about seeking advice from an actual lawyer before making business decisions.)
Generally speaking, you’re free to use someone else’s trademark so long as you use it in such a way that won’t mislead buyers into believing you are a licensee or otherwise affiliated with the trademark holder. This is called “Fair Use.” Once you to start to look for it, you’ll realize that you see examples of this everywhere. If you purchase a phone charging cable, for instance, the packaging often lists compatible phone models. Those model names are all trademarks, but the cable manufacturer can use them so long as the packaging doesn’t give buyers the impression they are buying an officially sanctioned Apple or Samsung product, etc. (That’s why manufacturers who do this sort of thing often place disclaimers on the packaging, just to be safe—“Cableco is not affiliated with Apple or Samsung.”) Another commmon example are TV commercials that make claims like “Eveready batteries last 12% longer than Duracell.”
Thus, there’s theoretically nothing stopping you from referring to “Dungeons & Dragons” in your text or even placing a notice on the cover of your product that says “compatible with Dungeons & Dragons” so long as you make certain that buyers understand this is not an officially licensed or sanctioned D&D product and you are not affiliated with WotC.
The old OGL contained a provision that specifically prevented you from using the D&D trademark in conjunction with your product. In other words, you had to agree to give up your right to Fair Use to use the OGL. The Creative Commons license has no such provision, although the SRD does ask, “Please do not include any other attribution to Wizards or its parent or affiliates other than that provided above. You may, however, include a statement on your work indicating that it is compatible with fifth edition.” To me, that looks like a request, not something with any legal force.
Generally speaking, you’re free to use someone else’s trademark so long as you use it in such a way that won’t mislead buyers into believing you are a licensee or otherwise affiliated with the trademark holder. This is called “Fair Use.” Once you to start to look for it, you’ll realize that you see examples of this everywhere. If you purchase a phone charging cable, for instance, the packaging often lists compatible phone models. Those model names are all trademarks, but the cable manufacturer can use them so long as the packaging doesn’t give buyers the impression they are buying an officially sanctioned Apple or Samsung product, etc. (That’s why manufacturers who do this sort of thing often place disclaimers on the packaging, just to be safe—“Cableco is not affiliated with Apple or Samsung.”) Another commmon example are TV commercials that make claims like “Eveready batteries last 12% longer than Duracell.”
Thus, there’s theoretically nothing stopping you from referring to “Dungeons & Dragons” in your text or even placing a notice on the cover of your product that says “compatible with Dungeons & Dragons” so long as you make certain that buyers understand this is not an officially licensed or sanctioned D&D product and you are not affiliated with WotC.
The old OGL contained a provision that specifically prevented you from using the D&D trademark in conjunction with your product. In other words, you had to agree to give up your right to Fair Use to use the OGL. The Creative Commons license has no such provision, although the SRD does ask, “Please do not include any other attribution to Wizards or its parent or affiliates other than that provided above. You may, however, include a statement on your work indicating that it is compatible with fifth edition.” To me, that looks like a request, not something with any legal force.
That's a good point. 3PPs were all 'trained' not to do that by the OGL, and that's been ingrained over 20+ years. But CC is a different beast. It might be that we need to drop some old habits.
Spellslinging Sellsword
Adventurer
I agree with it being a fair use situation. Here is a site that explains it in non-legal language for lay people.
www.inta.org
Fair Use of Trademarks (Intended for a Non-Legal Audience) - International Trademark Association
Let our Fact Sheets help you answer your basic questions about trademarks and related topics.
www.inta.org
I think it is there in case someone uses a CCed work in a way that the originator doesn't like. Like if I wrote "BowChickaWaWa: 5E Sexscapades The RPG" WotC might well ask me to not mention their name in the front cover.
Similar Threads
- Locked
