Trademarks and RPG:s

[dinelendarkstar]

Character Gen's and Copyright/IP

A lot of the discussions on the lists has been about published print products.

What I would like to find out is how one goes about reproducing information in the 4E material in a commercial character gen and not be in violation of these rights. Of course one would never want to replace the need for the books but yet be able to provide all the appropriate info for character/NPC management.

I would love to here thought on how to get this accomplished.

dinelendarkstar

 

[Treebore]

Expecially the oft-related at nauseum "mechanics can't be copyrighted" line which is a sure sign of a 12 year old who stumbled across a web page about copyright, thought it was relevant and gleefully posted it crowing about his original and incisive discovery. It's not relevant to any of these licenses.

Wow! The judges and lawyers who wrote article 17 of US law, including this:

"(b) In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work."

are a 12 year old?

Amazing.

A lot of the discussions on the lists has been about published print products.

What I would like to find out is how one goes about reproducing information in the 4E material in a commercial character gen and not be in violation of these rights. Of course one would never want to replace the need for the books but yet be able to provide all the appropriate info for character/NPC management.

I would love to here thought on how to get this accomplished.

dinelendarkstar

Well, unless Morrus is right, and a 12 year old wrote this:

"(b) In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work."

as long as you get the commercial character gen program out on the market first, and don't use WOTC trademarks or identities, or the closed code belonging to someone else, you should be good to go. So you can create it, just be careful not to use WOTC's name, names, trademarked symbols, etc... and definitely consult a copyright lawyer, you can then publish it, and even sell it, if your lawyer thinks its safe.

 

[pemerton]

as long as you get the commercial character gen program out on the market first, and don't use WOTC trademarks or identities, or the closed code belonging to someone else, you should be good to go. So you can create it, just be careful not to use WOTC's name, names, trademarked symbols, etc... and definitely consult a copyright lawyer, you can then publish it, and even sell it, if your lawyer thinks its safe.

Would you be worried if the output of the ChaGen program can only be made sense of when read in conjunction with the 4e rulebooks?

 

[Treebore]

Would you be worried if the output of the ChaGen program can only be made sense of when read in conjunction with the 4e rulebooks?

No, I wouldn't, but I think the general consumer doesn't like to be forced to think very much.

 

[Chaos Disciple]

Forked from: OGL 4E question

So I wonder - why do people think WotC owns any trademarks related to D&D (beyond Dungeons & Dragons)?

Anyone who wants to know what trademarks are registered by Wotc can search the United States Patent and Trademark Office Website

My search found 162 live trademarks owned by Wotc. I didnt count how many of them would apply to the D&D RPG but im sure its less then most people would have guessed.

 

[Treebore]

Anyone who wants to know what trademarks are registered by Wotc can search the United States Patent and Trademark Office Website

My search found 162 live trademarks owned by Wotc. I didnt count how many of them would apply to the D&D RPG but im sure its less then most people would have guessed.

True, but don't forget to pay attention to copyright as well. As long as you pay attention to both you are far less likely to get your butt bit by either.

 

[pbrink]

Anyone who wants to know what trademarks are registered by Wotc can search the United States Patent and Trademark Office Website

My search found 162 live trademarks owned by Wotc. I didnt count how many of them would apply to the D&D RPG but im sure its less then most people would have guessed.

No, it's not that many. Player's Handbook, Monster Manual and Dungeon Master Guide are the only ones. The settings are also registered and then there's a bunch of (what seems to me to be) Magic: the gathering cards.

Note that Handbook in Player's Handbook, Manual in Monster Manual and Guide in Dungeon Master Guide are disclaimed, it's only in combination with the prefix that they are trademarks. It's also interesting that there are allowed as trademarks because the title of a book, in it self, cannot be a trademark. These terms are also highly descriptive so it's only because WotC managed to claim that they were marks for a series of books that they got a registration. Also note that the abbreviations are not registered...

The above registrations are only valid in the U.S. and AFAIK WotC has only registered "Dungeons & Dragons" abroad.

As a footnote:
IMO a term such as Player's Handbook do not qualify as a trademark under European law, neither do Monster Manual. Both are descriptive and under European law it doesn't matter that they are used as a mark for a series of creative works - they are still just descriptive. Europe doesn't use common law trademarks, indeed some jurisdictions only protects registered marks. However if one can prove that the mark has become established on the market then the mark is protected. A sign is considered to have become established on the market when it is, within a significant portion of the circle for which it is intended, known as a symbol for the goods which are being made available under it. This is similar to the U.S. concept of "secondary meaning".

The term "significant portion" means about 30% of the actors on intended market and by "the circle for which it is intended" we mean:

• all persons that are potential customers of the goods or service and
• competitors and their staff and
• people that work in retail and/or handles the goods or service

(see the "Bostongurka" case)

The potential customers of a RPG are not just those who play or might play RPG:s, it's everyone who might play or buy games in general. 30% of these would have to a) recognize Player's Handbook as a trademark for b) a game and c) have a clue about it's source. Not likely to happen. The very same argument can, btw, be made for "d20" and "d20-system". I would even go further and suggest that "d20" is a generic (functional even) term that totally lacks distinctiveness.

 

[Chaos Disciple]

This is probably quite true. But my initial post was also a, somewhat sad, query on the reasons why people are so afraid of producing accessories to RPG:s in general. There are a lot of myths circling around out there, quite a few of which (of course) are faulty ideas about what you can do but there are also quite a bit of unfounded fear.

I dont think these "myths" about copyright protection are a coincidence. And just so you know, false copyright claims are more common then you think.

 

[FormerlyDickensC]

Just had a question for everyone.

I was looking at the fan created power card creations in the 4E forums. There is a lot of distribution of copyrighted work - no attempt to obfuscate and every attempt to assure accuracy and sameness.

Does this fall under fair use? Is it a violation? Or is it all arguable?

 

[starwed]

Those interested in these matters should check out Scrivener's Error, especially the essays on copyright, trademarks, and fan fiction.

The author is a lawyer who often takes cases in the publishing industry. (For instance, he represented Harlan Ellison when he sued AOL.) While you might disagree with him, he's at least someone from a knowledgeable background who has thought about these issues at length.

And while he's talking about fiction, not games, it's probably very similar when it comes to discussing the "fluff." And homebrewed modules set in, say, Faerun probably probably involve a lot of the same legal issues as fanficiton set there.