D&D 5E SRD5 - A Clone of Part of D&D 5E Basic

[Michael Morris]

This is what happens when non-attorney's think they can learn the finer intricacies of intellectual property law by reading some stuff on the internet.

I pity lawyers.

If a moron feeds a computer a bunch of gibberish filled with tortured logic it simply won't compile. If a moron plays around with law it can take some time for the legal system to shut him up, if it ever does. Compilers are cruel mistresses, but they don't suffer fools.

That and the whole Dunning Kruger effect.

 

[Dausuul]

"But OSRIC did it!"

Yes, but they were smart about it and I believe got legal consultation first. What Necromancer is doing is also close to infringing, but they could easily pull it off. Plus the owner is a judge, so pretty sure he's not going to step over the legal lines. This guy? Obviously didn't know the laws.

It looks as if he actually lifted some of the text of his license from the OSRIC license, with a light rewrite; for example, the bit about sending complimentary copies.

 

[Michael Morris]

I'm willing to bet that OSRIC would never survive a day in court if it was ever tested, but at this point I guess WotC figures they have better things to do with their legal team than sue over intellectual property over 2 decades old.

It does beg the question why corporations in general are so keen on maintaining copyrights for unreasonable lengths of time (life of the author + 100 years is unreasonable).

 

[Dausuul]

I'm willing to bet that OSRIC would never survive a day in court if it was ever tested, but at this point I guess WotC figures they have better things to do with their legal team than sue over intellectual property over 2 decades old.

It does beg the question why corporations in general are so keen on maintaining copyrights for unreasonable lengths of time (life of the author + 100 years is unreasonable).

I don't think all that many corporations are keen on it. It's a handful of corporations, and by "handful" I mean "Disney," trying to protect a handful of ancient copyrights that remain cash cows unto this day. The others are just along for the ride; the law lets them maintain the copyright, so they do.

But this is treading too close to politics for comfort, so I won't say any more on it.

 

[doctorhook]

What we're witnessing is a dark consequence of Open Gaming. 5E hasn't even been on the shelf for a week yet (and hasn't even seen general release!)*, but already somebody thinks they have the right to post it online and copyright it for himself under some legalese. Surely someone would have tried to post it online without Open Gaming, but Open Gaming gives some idiots the idea that they are legally entitled to do so.

*According to itself, srd5.org was operational and preparing for launch on 2 July 2014, the day before the official launch of 5E.

 

[Michael Morris]

What we're witnessing is a dark consequence of Open Gaming. 5E hasn't even been on the shelf for a week yet (and hasn't even seen general release!)*, but already somebody thinks they have the right to post it online and copyright it for himself under some legalese. Surely someone would have tried to post it online without Open Gaming, but Open Gaming gives some idiots the idea that they are legally entitled to do so.

*According to itself, srd5.org was operational and preparing for launch on 2 July 2014, the day before the official launch of 5E.

Not a consequence of Open Gaming - just a consequence of stupidity. If not the OGL, the moron would no doubt use some other claim.

 

[doctorhook]

Not a consequence of Open Gaming - just a consequence of stupidity. If not the OGL, the moron would no doubt use some other claim.

Sure, but would they be as likely to believe it's legal, instead of just pretend it is?

Anyway, it's a moot question.

 

[Abstruse]

I'm willing to bet that OSRIC would never survive a day in court if it was ever tested, but at this point I guess WotC figures they have better things to do with their legal team than sue over intellectual property over 2 decades old.

It does beg the question why corporations in general are so keen on maintaining copyrights for unreasonable lengths of time (life of the author + 100 years is unreasonable).

OSRIC actually might survive a lawsuit if they can afford to finish the trial. You can't legally copyright rules mechanics. You can only copyright the presentation of the rules mechanics and the intellectual property associated with it. That's the loophole that OSRIC and several other games live in, along with a lot of unlicensed third party products.

What this guy's doing, however, is copying the rules presentation. He might've gotten away with it until he copied the Backgrounders verbatim. They've got him now if they want to sue. And I guarantee you the second he posts anything that isn't available for free (Starter Set or PHB), they'll take him out.

 

[the Jester]

Just after a quick glance, that isn't a retroclone, that's a cut & paste.
[MENTION=697]mearls[/MENTION] [MENTION=56746]mudbunny[/MENTION] .... I think that site needs a cease & desist slapdown pronto, and I'm pretty far on the extreme loose end in my view on copyright as a concept. But this SRD5 crosses the line, IMHO.

 

[Artificer]

Ahh, when I visited earlier, the links all seemed to take me to [www . srd5 . org / license.htm], which was dead. At the moment, the boilerplate text at the bottom still links to the broken page.

Thanks for pointing that out. It has been fixed.

SRD5 is not created with the intent of damaging Wizards of the Coast or breaking laws. It is also unlikely that I will ever make any money from it.

Creating SRD5 is my way of supporting D&D. I looked at previous uses of the OGL and decided to try and create a rules reference that people might want that also didn't exist yet. The OGL is part of the reason 3rd edition was so unanimously adopted. I don't know about other people, but in my circle of friends we used sites like dndsrd all the time to look things up quickly. Having the basic rules readily available made more room for other books (settings, splat) at the table.

There has been a lot of discussion about the logo license. I would like to clear up its intent. As with all OGL content, you are free to use the content under the terms of the OGL. SRD5 content is no different. The SRD5 Compatibility License is optional, and SDR5 is required to provide it as per the OGL's requirements in section 7, "Use of Product Identity" in order for anyone to be allowed to indicate compatibility. The OSRIC Open License does something similar, and as someone noticed I slipped an homage to it into the SRD5 version.

Jim