When does a rule violate copyright/d20 license?

[trancejeremy]

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.

It's apples & oranges.

If you don't have the WOTC book in question, then you won't be able to copy it word for word, even unconciously. That is the real trouble with copyright infringement.

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/102.html

"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"

The ideas/rules in WOTC books aren't protected, only the words themselves.

As to the more trickier aspect, derivative work, it actually is a defense to say that your work isn't derivative, because you never read the work in question.

 

[Turjan]

The ideas/rules in WOTC books aren't protected, only the words themselves.

As to the more trickier aspect, derivative work, it actually is a defense to say that your work isn't derivative, because you never read the work in question.

Ah, thanks for the clarification.

But it's always hard to prove the nonexistence of something. Or do the law enforcers have to find you sitting in front of that copyrighted book where the idea might have been derived from?

 

[Ranger REG]

Wizards' lawyers will have to prove that your expression of an idea is exactly the same as their expression of an idea, and such evidence must be in your Work.

 

[Nellisir]

Don't think about WotC at all. Don't think about how they did it in Masters, or Arms & Equipment. You can't copy it, and you can't refer to it. You might get inspiration, but the moment you flip open the book to "check how WotC did it", you're breaking through the ice.

Look of other d20 or OGL resources that offer what you need. ENWorld Publishing has a pdf that deals with horses and mounts -- they might have primitive vehicle rules. I'll bet Spycraft has modern vehicle rules. Bastion Press has a pdf (Druids & Druidism) that might include herbalism rules and information, along with Atlas Games's Occult Lore (which has a huger herbalism appendix).

Threads online here, and emails to publishers, should help you find out what products to look for and buy.

 

[afstanton]

<snip>

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.

<snip>

You might want to talk to Chaosium and WotC and see how much money changed hands for licensing before you assume the Cthulhu mythos is public domain.

Sure, nothing's stopping you from making creepy-crawly things from beyond the understanding of mortal man, but if I were you I wouldn't call it Nyarlathotep.

I guess the point is that you have to do your homework on trademarks, copyright, and now OGC vs. PI if you want to get into this in any serious way. (It's even conceivable that you could run into patent issues, as that's another area of IP law that I didn't mention...but in this industry that's not much of a concern as far as I can tell.)

Asking questions here is always good, and many people here are pretty knowledgeable, but many are not. I only know of two honest to goodness lawyers that are directly involved in the industry, and I can only remember Clark's name off the top of my head.

Aaron

As always...IANAL

 

[TheAuldGrump]

You might want to talk to Chaosium and WotC and see how much money changed hands for licensing before you assume the Cthulhu mythos is public domain.
<SNIP!>
Aaron

As always...IANAL

Not to mention Arkham House - from whom Chaosium licenses the Cthulhu Mythos... After HPL's death August Derleth grabbed up most of the copyrights for the mythos.

The Auld Grump

 

[Henry]

Not to mention Arkham House - from whom Chaosium licenses the Cthulhu Mythos... After HPL's death August Derleth grabbed up most of the copyrights for the mythos.

The Auld Grump

I am not a lawyer, of course, BUT...

Actually, some of Lovecraft's work is INDISPUTABLY public domain, having been produced before January 1st, 1923. Of the balance, most of it is either in contest, or in dispute since 1987 or so. (According to Wikipedia.com, Canada and Australia have copyright law of Life of Author + 50 years, so technically, ALL of his works are open in those countries).

It never hurts to check, of course, but all of Lovecraft's stuff is on the verge of being indisputably PD, and unless someone extends a perpetual copyright, that's not changing. (Heck, if Disney is having a hard time getting one for Mickey, how hard would Derleth's estate have?!?!)

 

[TheAuldGrump]

I am not a lawyer, of course, BUT...

Actually, some of Lovecraft's work is INDISPUTABLY public domain, having been produced before January 1st, 1923. Of the balance, most of it is either in contest, or in dispute since 1987 or so. (According to Wikipedia.com, Canada and Australia have copyright law of Life of Author + 50 years, so technically, ALL of his works are open in those countries).

It never hurts to check, of course, but all of Lovecraft's stuff is on the verge of being indisputably PD, and unless someone extends a perpetual copyright, that's not changing. (Heck, if Disney is having a hard time getting one for Mickey, how hard would Derleth's estate have?!?!)

Ayuh, the problem is an awful lot of stuff was produced after Lovecraft's death.

But the big problem is I am not sure who owns the trademark, which can be renewed indefinetely. So while the story The Call of Cthulhu is quite securely public domain the name Cthulhu may not be. Which is I believe why Chaosium licenses Call of Cthulhu from them.

The Auld Grump, there is more than one kind of intellectual property...

 

[arwink]

(According to Wikipedia.com, Canada and Australia have copyright law of Life of Author + 50 years, so technically, ALL of his works are open in those countries).

I can't speak for Canada, but it's unlikely that the copywrite is free here. IANAL, but from memorythe timespan Henry is quoting is how long before copywrite needs to be renewed by the authors estate - which largely translates as whoever owns the rights when copywright comes up for grabs.

 

[Unseelie]

Not to mention Arkham House - from whom Chaosium licenses the Cthulhu Mythos... After HPL's death August Derleth grabbed up most of the copyrights for the mythos.

The Auld Grump

True, but the verdict is still out... Lovecraft's works prior to 1923 are public domain. His works which came after 1923 would have had to been renewed to retain copyright and there is no record of this having been done.

Arkham House did indeed claim to own the copyright to Lovecraft's work, but they did not renew them either, so it appears that all of his work has fallen into public domain.

It is my understanding, that with this knowledge, that Chaosium no longer pays anything to Arkham House as they likely have not legally owned the rights to HPL since the mid 60's and were never entitled to collect said licensing fees.