When does a rule violate copyright/d20 license?

[wocky]

Everything outside of the SRDs is copyrighted and not Open Game Content... OK...
Yet, if I were to make my own OGC rules for anything WotC already did, and my rules ended up pretty similar to theirs... how similar would they have to be for it to be a copyright violation or the d20 license?

And I don't mean "similar" with bad intent. Two people might rule very similarly because of a good understanding of how the d20 system should accomplish something. What about the DCs of certain tasks? What if your own ideas matched WotC's pretty closely?

 

[Ranger REG]

Read My Disclaimer Below.

If you mean that both you and Wizards released a product each at nearly the same time, that just so happens to contain similar rules? Unless Wizards can find out if you sent a corporate spy to steal their material during the development of their product for your own, it is most likely to be sheer coincidence.

If you mean that you created a new rule you want to OGC and that rule is a Derivative of another OGC, then as long you update your OGL to include the title of the Work you based on in Section 15 Copyright Notice, you should be okay.

Exactly what you intend to do?

 

[trancejeremy]

Everything outside of the SRDs is copyrighted and not Open Game Content... OK...
Yet, if I were to make my own OGC rules for anything WotC already did, and my rules ended up pretty similar to theirs... how similar would they have to be for it to be a copyright violation or the d20 license?

Well, bear in mind, you cannot really copyright rules (just the specific wording), you have to patent them.

But, really, if you are a d20 writer, you should simply not own or read any WOTC book.

 

[Nellisir]

But, really, if you are a d20 writer, you should simply not own or read any WOTC book.

It's a nice idea, but pretty unrealistic.

It depends on what you're trying to do. Making a Scarlet Wizard of Thaay won't pass. Making a list of skill check DCs should be fine.

The best way to avoid problems is to not look at the WotC books. I think it's unrealistic to expect gamers who happen to be writers to not own any books by the premier company in their hobby, but when you're writing d20/OGC material -- DON'T look at them. You'll be amazed at how much you can't remember, and you'll have to create it all over again -- which is what you're trying to do anyways.

Cheers

 

[Turjan]

The best way to avoid problems is to not look at the WotC books.

Errrm... Since when does not knowing copyrighted material prevent you from being persecuted because of copyright violations? Does not reading law books prevent you from appearing in front of court if you steal something in a supermarket?

Maybe you should not look to close at WotC books before creating your rules, but it's definitely a good idea to give them a very close look before publishing your product.

 

[wocky]

Some examples of what I mean:

- You want some rules dealing with vehicles, like the ones that appeared in Dragon magazine and then in the Arms & Equipment guide. (They might be OGC, I don't know, if they are just humor me). What if the rules you create match WotC's rules in many aspects?

- I want a feat that removes a certain penalty from certain action. This type of feat usually remove AoOs and give +4 to the check... so there's a big chance that if I do it "my way" it'll match WotCs take. Would I be in violation of the license?

- In another thread I was pointed to specific rules in "Masters of the Wild" dealing with DCs (and checks that should be performed) when looking for herbs in the wilderness to avoid part of the cost of doing a scroll-like eatable druidic preparation.
Now suppose I want to rule the checks a druid should do (and their DCs) for looking for herbs in the wilderness which he can replace for part of the cost of a potion-like preparation... what if my own concepts closely match those in "Masters..."?

I know no court would let me go free with my own "Brain Flayer", but what if there's a non-OGC feat or rule that is pretty much the obvious way to go about it?

A similar problem exists in programming. Certain algorithms (i.e. "the way to do something") get patented, when they'd be invented just as they are if they didn't exist.

 

[der_kluge]

Wocky, the thing of it is, is that you only have to prove that your thing is derivitive of something that is OGC.

In other words, a feat is hardly something that WoTC would call you on the carpet for. If you created a feat, and it looks like, smells like, and acts like many other feats, even if WoTC already has a very similar one that exists in a non-SRD source, I seriously doubt they are going to care if you make a similar feat. Obviously, you should give it a different name.

And creating a brain-flayer is iffy. The use of the word "flayer" is really treading on thin ice. But, I don't see why you couldn't create an evil, psionic, tentacle-faced humanoid creature based on the Cthulhu mythos, which I understand is public domain. That's what mind flayers are, anyway. So, just do what WoTC did originally, and call them something else.

Just like you could create a snake/human hybrid. Just don't call them Yuan-Ti, and you're good to go.

 

[Ranger REG]

Some examples of what I mean:

- You want some rules dealing with vehicles, like the ones that appeared in Dragon magazine and then in the Arms & Equipment guide. (They might be OGC, I don't know, if they are just humor me). What if the rules you create match WotC's rules in many aspects?

If you knowingly created a rule that Wizards have already created and it is not designated OGC, then you would be in violation of copyright law. Technically.

- I want a feat that removes a certain penalty from certain action. This type of feat usually remove AoOs and give +4 to the check... so there's a big chance that if I do it "my way" it'll match WotCs take. Would I be in violation of the license?

The OGL allows you to re-use and modify OGCs. (Please tell me you read the OGL's definition.)

If the feat in question is in the SRD or designated OGC from third-party source, and you wish to modify or improve upon it, then you can do that. Just remember, any material that is Derived from a prior OGC must remain OGC.

- In another thread I was pointed to specific rules in "Masters of the Wild" dealing with DCs (and checks that should be performed) when looking for herbs in the wilderness to avoid part of the cost of doing a scroll-like eatable druidic preparation.
Now suppose I want to rule the checks a druid should do (and their DCs) for looking for herbs in the wilderness which he can replace for part of the cost of a potion-like preparation... what if my own concepts closely match those in "Masters..."?

See first response.

I know no court would let me go free with my own "Brain Flayer", but what if there's a non-OGC feat or rule that is pretty much the obvious way to go about it?

Then ask permission. The worst thing they can do is deny you the use of copyrighted material.

 

[maddman75]

A similar problem exists in programming. Certain algorithms (i.e. "the way to do something") get patented, when they'd be invented just as they are if they didn't exist.

Note that non-OGC materials are not patented. They are copyrighted. The difference is that patents protect an idea, while copyrights protect an expression of an idea.

For instance, the idea of a cthuluesque psionic squidheaded humanoid as expressed in the D&D Mind Flayer is copyrighted. You don't have permission to use it under the OGL, so you can't use it. But it isn't patented, so you can use another expression of this basic idea just fine. You just can't call it mind flayer, nor can it be the same thing with a different name. If it had a different appearance, name, stats, and abilities but still fell into the category of 'cthuluesque psionic squidheaded humanoid' you'd be okay.

To use your software example, Microsoft has a copyright on Microsoft Word. I can't write a program that works just like Word and has the same name. But they don't have a patent on the idea of "word processor", so you can get other programs like WordPerfect and OpenOffice. While they share many of the same features, tehy are different programs that follow the same idea.

Oh, and IANAL, or even a publisher. Just another message board monkey.

 

[tensen]

Looking at your descriptions... the vehicle base probably has something important to your document. Likely you will be handling it group of other information and things evolved around it. The actual game mechanics may be the same, but it would rarely involve text that was even vaguely similar.


The question on the feats and the like... there is the question of why particularly it was needed. It may just be me, but unless the material is intregal to your product.. it is always better to err on the safe side and ignore anything that treads too close. For copyright purposes you may still be safe since we are talking about game mechanics. But copright really isn't the issue if you deal with the d20 license. You are playing a game with whether or not you can use their license and they don't have to bring you to court to tell you that you can't.