Spellbook piracy: is it theft?

[Charwoman Gene]

The action of copying spells is functionally equivalent to copying software.

You are dealing with the non-destructive reproduction of symbolic instructions that can be repeatedly used to obtain desired results. Spells are software run on the hardware on the universe. ((I will stop this now, as it makes me remember the tremendous potential in Mage: the Ascension, which never completely gelled in-game))

The question of whether copying spells is theft is completely predicated on the social constructs that may or may not exist regarding IP. It is 100% the same as software. Be a great thing to toy with in a Urban Arcana environment. Medieval societies should have nearly no IP laws. Renaissance or Heavily Magical Anachronistic Socieities just might... ((Eberron?))

 

[jinx crossbow]

It's plagiarism. Unless you use footnotes or endnotes.

You wanted to say. If a wizzard casts a spell he has to call:
"This fireball killed your frinds becaus Bigby let me copy it" ?

Jinx

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

Most D&D world aren't really familiar with the concept of "intellectual property" other than the bragging rights due to an inventor of a particular spell. In a standard, pseudo-medieval fantasy world, it is pretty much impossible to regulate the exchange of spells - unless the inventor simply doesn't give them to anyone else. He can give the spell to a few, trusted friends, but he'd better be sure that they won't pass it on to their friends in turn.

Of course, if you have larger, more organized nations with a decent communication infrastructure, the government can attempt to regulate the spread of spells by giving them a patent - with one, the inventor has the monopoly on the use of the spell for a certain period (or even as long as he lives... though that might not be in the best interest of the nation), and anyone else who wants to use it (especially if they want to use it for profit) needs to get his permission, and probably pay for the privilege.

This is possible with Renaissance-era settings or later. However, the equivalent of "intellectual property" laws only becomes plausible with the equivalent of modern communication technology (telegraphs, telephones, and so forth) and a large regulation bureaucracy, or else it becomes impossible to enforce.

 

[nute]

1) SRD says that it is common for wizards to charge for others to copy spells out of their spellbook, recommended cost is Spell Level x 50gp. If this is common practice, then if one wizard copied a spell from another without providing recompense, he is guilty of benefiting from a service without paying. While there is no physical theft (no physical object has been taken from the service provider), there is an implicit agreement in the act of copying a spell that appropriate payment must be given. It would be akin to sneaking into a movie theater without paying - technically you haven't stolen anything, but you are benefiting from a service without providing compensation.

2) The RAW states that when a wizard gains a level, he gains two new spells of each level he can cast. It does not state that there is a payment for these spells. Thus the implication is that he either has figured out the formula for these new spells during his adventuring, or that he somehow acquires them for free through legitimate means (it would not be fair to a player to receive a penalty for the benefits of gaining a level).

3) Nothing is preventing a DM from adding on to the rules in the name of campaign flavor. One concept could be different types of wizards' guilds. An "open-source" guild that believes in free and open exchange of knowledge. "Come on in, help yourself to our spellbook library. We'll just peruse your book in exchange and copy anything we don't have in our records, okay?" Another would be a hardcore researchers' guild. "If you want to learn a new spell from us, you have to research a spell we don't have on the books yet." Yet another would be a scroll exchange house. Give them a 7th level scroll, get back 7 spell levels worth of scrolls that you can scribe into your spellbook or use as you see fit.

 

[Janx]

Jurgen's hit it on the head.

Yes spells are like software. However, in a society that is lacking formal copyright, trademark, and intelectual property laws, there's no formal recognition of copying spells as being a crime.

However, an act doesn't have to be a crime, for it to be wrong.

In the real world, I once had a software program I was working on copied by a friend, so he could tweak on it. He did it without my permission, by grabbing the floppy it was on, and copying it and putting it back (this was a long time ago, I was in school). I was not happy. I tossed a magnet in his disk-case the next day. Problem solved.

This little anecdote is analagous to how a wizard would feel if somebody came into his tower, copied on of his private spells (one he hasn't shared with anyone), and then started using it. It's also indicative of how the wizard might handle it.

I suspect that all the player's handbook spells are public domain. They've been copied (probably without permission) so many times, its impossible to stop it (and the original author is likely dead). I also suspect that if a wizard creates a new spell (one created by the player or DM), if he doesn't share it with anybody, he will be very mad if it pops up anywhere. A Wizard who creates a spell is NOT likely to share that spell with anyone, except his favorite secret society of mages that also intends to keep it secret. The reason, is that possession of a spell that nobody else has is valuable. It gives you an ability that nobody else has. That in turn means you can get jobs to solve certain problems, that other wizards can't, because you have the spell you wrote to solve that problem.

Think of it this way, the author of "Carry on a real conversation with a dead person" spell is looking to make money by hiring himself out to police investigators, and cruel overlords who went overboard in the torture room. If everybody had the spell, they wouldn't be so valuable.

Janx

 

[Mercule]

Given any kind of reasonable copyright laws, the vast majority of spells would have long since passed into the public domain. So no.

Exactly. Because a world that has infernal pacts would never touch the DMCA. Actually, the devils might view it as a turf war.

GodOfCheese, you're my hero of the day. Now, if you'll excuse me, I seem to have inspirition for an Eberron campaign. It seems there are some gnomes looking to litigate.

 

[wingsandsword]

If, big if, modern copyright rules existed in most D&D worlds, I'd imagine that most if not all PHB spells would have been long since entered into the public domain. I know that in the Forgotten Realms most of the PHB spells date back to Netheril, and thus are millennia old, and even long-lived creators have been dead for many centuries.

Also, what are Sorcerers if spell copyright exists? Walking copyright violations when they realize they can shoot Magic Missile from their fingertips one day? What happens when they learn to write scrolls and start to create Magic Missile scrolls but aren't a part of the Wizardly community with regards to research and attribution?

I like the "academic research" model that ephemeron put forth, it seems to feel right for D&D wizards.

On a side note, this reminds me of a spell from a campaign I played in back in the 2e era: "Slay Familiar". The DM ran spells as working like computer programs, and that spell had deceptive "external documentation". In other words, the spell description that PC's get isn't what it does. The spell description says it's a 1st level Necromancy spell that slays a targeted familiar no-save. It actually instantly kills the familiar of the caster with no save.

The NPC wizard who created it made it as a trap, he never casts it, but it's there if anybody tries to steal spells from his spellbook, they'll end up killing their familiar as punishment.

 

[Cthulhudrew]

You wanted to say. If a wizzard casts a spell he has to call:
"This fireball killed your frinds becaus Bigby let me copy it" ?

Actually, though, that makes me think of something that I'd been considering in regards to a story once. That being, that many spells cast by wizards come with their own "signatures"- sort of like the code that programmers occasionally put into work they've done. It's nothing that affects the functioning of the program, but it's their own signature saying "This was done by me". In the case of a spell, it wouldn't be anything that would affect the spell, or necessarily even in the casting (like a different somatic or verbal component or anything), but something that could be detected by a close analysis of the spell using any of your general detection abilities. Sort of like an arcane mark built into the functioning of a spell.

 

[Voadam]

When a wizard copies a spell from another wizard's spellbook, is this essentially software piracy?

If there is a specific law in the campaign world against copying without permission and a copyer does not gain permission or legal right, then it would be analogous.

Otherwise no.

So in most D&D games, no.

 

[Pbartender]

I think there would be such wizards. I also think there would be wizards who feel that "knowledge is power" and try to keep such spells to themselves, or maybe themselves and their cronies.

The real question is, which group is in charge?

Or, more practically, which group did you just copy a spell from without permission, and what are they likely to do about it?

Remember, in D&D spells are knowledge and potentially powerful knowledge at that. It's more akin to having the knowledge of how to build and operate a particular peice of technology -- gunpowder, combustion engines, fixed wing aircraft or short wave radios, for example.

Even the good guys want to keep that sort of knowledge to themselves as much as possible, because it represents a distinct advantage over their enemies... You give the enemy nothing, if possible, and you give your friends as little as you can get away with.