Werecabbage legal cohort

It has become clear that the GSL is not freelance friendly (or even third party publisher friendly).

It is also clear that a number of people would love to have material printed for both third and fourth edition.

A number of publishers appear to be ignoring the GSL and publishing their own material under regular US copyright laws (which state that a game cannot be copyrighted, to the best of my knowledge).

These publishers include:
KenzerCO
Adamant Entertainment
possibly Goodman Games
Green Ronin (using the OGL)
http://www.enworld.org/articles/Green_Ronin_Reject_the_GSL/6812

See these threads for some info:
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1059210
http://www.enworld.org/forum/showpost.php?p=4374142&postcount=217


I can imagine the fear of the "little guy" both in terms of legal fees and in "slipping up" if only bound by copyright law. No one wants to be sued, and no one wants to lose if they are.

So I am suggesting that the werecabbages band together (possibly with some of the other third party publishers...is Mongoose still on the fence?) and establish a legal cohort that members can contribute smaller sums for advice and representation, in the hopes that an organization can be created that would not be able to be "bullied" by Hasbro/WotC when they are in the legal right.

Cross posted on Nick Logue's SINISTER ADVENTURES forums.
http://www.sinisteradventures.com/index.php/forums?func=view&catid=5&id=2745#2745
and
Crossposted in Wolfgang Baur's KOBOLD QUARTERLY forums. [URL]http://www.koboldquarterly.com/kqforums/viewtopic.php?p=1649#1649
http://www.koboldquarterly.com/kqforums/viewtopic.php?p=1649#1649
[/URL]
 

log in or register to remove this ad


A number of publishers appear to be ignoring the GSL and publishing their own material under regular US copyright laws (which state that a game cannot be copyrighted, to the best of my knowledge).

Perhaps I'm incorrect here, but I don't believe US Copyright law explicitly says games cannot be covered - it is more basic than that. Copyright covers particular expression of an idea, but not the idea itself.

As an analogy - copyright does not cover the plot of a book, but only the particular expression you use to convey that plot. Similarly, copyright does not cover the rules of the game (or any other system of accomplishing anything), but does cover all the particular images used to covey those rules.

If you wan tot protect your game, and it actually has original rules and mechanics, you use a patent, not a copyright.
 

Bear in mind, my understanding of Green Ronin's "4E OGL" Character Record Portfolio is that it's published under the OGL, but (I'm guessing here) uses generic enough terms that can't be copyrighted. That is, they can put "Will Defense" and a blank field after that to write a number in, etc.

Hence, this isn't really using the OGL or copyright law to try and get around the GSL. More like it's an OGL product that "just happens" to work perfectly for a 4E character.
 


Good call

I suppose it would be an internal matter.

I, however, don't know how to contact them en masse very well, so I thought I'd put it up for discussion.

I also don't think it needs to be limited to them, per se. I guess I really meant that it would be a good idea for freelancers to "unionize" and I latched on to the Werecabbages as they are a group of freelancers (though as has been pointed out on the Sinister Adventures boards, they are not a legal entity).

I also wanted to suggest that, even more than freelancers, perhaps publishing companies could apply this idea.

Here is a post I wrote on the Sinister Adventures boards that clarifies my idea a bit better:


I'm suggesting freelancers...

..."Unionize" in a sense. That is, everyone in the group pays a small amount of money to a single laywer/firm to do two things:

1. To clarify, in writing (perhaps writing up a "license" for freelancers) of what is and is not acceptable to do in regards to copywright law in 4.0 (based upon a solid knowledge of prior case law).

2. To be on retainer should one of the group be sued for their work.

In essence, I'm talking about a sort of legal insurance policy here.


I think that if the group was to get some of the major publishers on board (Green Ronin, KenzerCo, and others) as part of this scenario (with an appropriately higher share in the costs) it could really create a solid defense from WotC either suing for actual copywright/trademark infringement or for suing just to "outmoney" the little guy into bending and breaking even if the little guy was in the right.

Publishers having a pooled legal resource is your idea, and it's a great one, in my opinion. I certainly think that a freelancer who publishes 4e under a specific publisher should be protected by them (at least in the sense that if someone gets sued, it should be the publisher, not the writer).

Extending this to multiple publishers/companies, though could provide the same advantage I'm talking about above. If Green Ronin, KenzerCo, and others all pool money in order to forestall the likelihoood that one of these companies gets sued I think all parties might breathe easier.

Think of it as a class action defense against an unreasonable contract (GSL).
 


Perhaps I'm incorrect here, but I don't believe US Copyright law explicitly says games cannot be covered - it is more basic than that.

Yes - the law says that methods and procedures cannot be copyrighted. That appears to cover game mechanics, as I believe was held in the Monopoly case. Copyright applies to any particular description of those mechanics and procedures. Generally, though, Trade marks are the most useful right for games publishers. The Scrabble/Scrabulous dispute is interesting.
 

Freelancers are not likely to be named a defendant in a lawsuit if a publisher releases something that they end up getting sued for. The publisher is ultimately the final arbiter of what gets released, so if some material that the freelancer gives them isn't consistent with copyright laws or any license the company might be working under, it is the company's responsibility to smack the freelancer and have them redo it to make it compliant. There is always the possibility that a publisher could take action against a freelancer for turning over material that got them sued, but I find this to be a highly unlikely scenario. The Werecabbages would not get much of an advantage from pitching in for common legal representation, at least not to combat 4th edition/GSL issues. There are reasons why legal representation might not be the worst idea in the world for such an organization, but I'm not going to go into that.

Now if the various publishers wanted to band together for common legal funding, that would their decision, though in all honesty, I also find that highly unlikely for a variety of other reasons.
 


Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top