-
Please note: In an effort to ensure that all of our users feel welcome on our forums, we’ve updated our forum rules. You can review the updated rules here: http://forums.wolflair.com/showthread.php?t=5528.
If a fellow Community member is not following the forum rules, please report the post by clicking the Report button (the red yield sign on the left) located on every post. This will notify the moderators directly. If you have any questions about these new rules, please contact support@wolflair.com.
- The Lone Wolf Development Team
Forgotten realms Data?
- Thread starter cyberqat
- Start date
Mechanics can definitely be copyrighted.
WotC has chosen to release some elements of 3.5, 4e and 5e under the OGL. This has never included any of the Wotc published settings, a handful of monsters (beholders, umber hulks, githyankis, githzerai and maybe a few others) and a few others. You can find the precise details in the OGL's.
WotC has chosen to release some elements of 3.5, 4e and 5e under the OGL. This has never included any of the Wotc published settings, a handful of monsters (beholders, umber hulks, githyankis, githzerai and maybe a few others) and a few others. You can find the precise details in the OGL's.
MaxSupernova
Well-known member
Do you have anything to clarify that? Because as a statement in itself, that is wrong.
https://www.mcvuk.com/business/game-mechanics-cannot-be-protected-by-copyright
https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/493249/mythbusting-game-design-and-copyright-trademarks-a
You can copyright your rules as written, but if someone rewords them and makes the exact same game, you are out of luck.
Just because some idiot judge ruled that way doesn't change things. Someone with deep enough pockets will eventually take that to an appellate court and get the ruling fixed. It is obviously copyright material.
This is exactly like the time some other idiot judge ruled that software owners needed to own three licenses for their software. One for the copy on the original media, one on the hard disk and one for the software running in RAM or they were in violation of copyright. That got overturned.
This is exactly like the time some other idiot judge ruled that software owners needed to own three licenses for their software. One for the copy on the original media, one on the hard disk and one for the software running in RAM or they were in violation of copyright. That got overturned.
MaxSupernova
Well-known member
Those were just examples. I wasn't pointing exclusively to those.
Copyright is of the expression of an idea, not of the idea itself.
Can you point to the "things" that don't change, because everything I've ever read says different that you.
Copyright is of the expression of an idea, not of the idea itself.
Can you point to the "things" that don't change, because everything I've ever read says different that you.
Last edited:
The exact text is obviously copyrighted. The rules themselves may need to be patented but I know quite a lot about IP law and the usual issue in arguing over infringement is the judge and/or the jury simply doesn't understand or care enough about the subject matter to make an intelligent decision, see moronic ruling on needing 3 licenses for software above.
In previous cases, back in the early days of RPG's, many games blatantly ripped off D&D's basic mechanics. TSR simply sent off cease and desist letters and the companies involved most closed up shop. Some tried to change their systems but none ever actually tried to challenge whether TSR owned the D&D system. The idea that someone else could take the PHB and the DMG reword them and release them under new titles is simply so blatantly absurd as to be laughable and if you try I guarantee you that Hasbro will crush you
In previous cases, back in the early days of RPG's, many games blatantly ripped off D&D's basic mechanics. TSR simply sent off cease and desist letters and the companies involved most closed up shop. Some tried to change their systems but none ever actually tried to challenge whether TSR owned the D&D system. The idea that someone else could take the PHB and the DMG reword them and release them under new titles is simply so blatantly absurd as to be laughable and if you try I guarantee you that Hasbro will crush you
MaxSupernova
Well-known member
The concepts of patent, copyright and trademark are all intertwined, and the power of a large corporation to use money and legal hammers to force smaller entities to give in regardless of who is actually correct is not in doubt.
All I said was that you can't copyright mechanics. *And you can't*. I wasn't giving a detailed lecture on intellectual property. If you're going to discuss this type of thing you need to get details correct. Good grief.
Look at us, squabbling amongst ourselves just to keep busy while LWD completely ignores us.
All I said was that you can't copyright mechanics. *And you can't*. I wasn't giving a detailed lecture on intellectual property. If you're going to discuss this type of thing you need to get details correct. Good grief.
Look at us, squabbling amongst ourselves just to keep busy while LWD completely ignores us.
Well, we should probably remember that our good friend kbs just underwent serious surgery and might not quite be himself right now.
Kbs, I hope you are doing well, and forgive us if we are grousing about your behavior if it is drug-induced. I hope you heal well and quickly.
Kbs, I hope you are doing well, and forgive us if we are grousing about your behavior if it is drug-induced. I hope you heal well and quickly.
Who? What? Where?
Really ridiculous that rules cannot be protected. At least for some time they should have an exclusive like in pharma industry and other process where the first inventor invested much more time / money to develop the idea, than the copycats.
I think the general issue with game rules is that most games are a mix of little bits from lots of other games. Pretty much nothing is truly original. Probably the only copyright/trademark/patent could relate to a particular combination of lots of little bits.
Rules can definitely be protected, it is Mechanics that can't be. Hasbro definitely could protect the rules of D&D but they couldn't stop you from making a game that used the same six attributes (Strength, Dexterity, etc). They could prevent you from calling it anything to do with Dungeons and Dragons, or even from probably naming it Dungeons and Demons, as an obvious derivative, but the basic mechanics such as spellcasting and attacking cannot be prevented
Dark Lord Galen
Well-known member
Spot on Erin... EXCEPT above... they tried on more than one occasion to eliminate competition via that... it was tossed, and not derivative....
Tunnels & Trolls in late 70s was first that came to my mind and was attacked by then TSR, and later again by WOC in 2005.
Gygax Magazine (yea that Gygax) was a periodical in similar form to Dragon Magazine and again was attacked via WOC/Hazbro, and again tossed as not related to the IP they held over World of Greyhawk (something I keep up with in detail). And after personally speaking with Luke Gygax on this, the basis of claim ironically was the very name itself. The court ruled that a man has the right to his own name was the basis of dismissal. Unfortunately in this particular case, it ended up quagmired in an internal family battle and died.
And lastly...
Mazes & Monsters, which by any standard was a blatant aim at D&D... and any growing up in the late 70s / early 80s will tell you an impact on the game... but again tossed not once but twice since they (as you note in your post above) were not RPGs but a Novel & made for TV Movie....
The follow up book "The Dungeon Master" couldn't get any bolder at "re-use" of a name...
And while WOC could continue filing suits... at some point they reach the law of diminishing return... I suppose....
DLG
Ok, I sit corrected and educated
. I agree that it is mostly a waste of time and resources to pursue these things for 99% of offenders, but WotC ARE notoriously bad for going after copyright infringement.Dark Lord Galen
Well-known member
Ok, I sit corrected and educated
OH VERY MUCH AGREE on the WOC observation.... even when they have no basis for it....
I have a friend (shameless Plug for Casey below) that published some work they did as a collective on The World of Greyhawk- Bandit Kingdoms... and they went after him...
Now understand, he was a non-paid lead member of what was called the "triad" back in what was termed "Living-Greyhawk" in the early 2000's. And all he did was assemble the work many did under one binded book so to speak. He credited them, and basically the cost to print was a wash vs profit, but WOC filed anyway... after 3 different meetings through arbitration, they finally pulled the suit....
Ironically the only ones that would use the perioditcal would be Greyhawk users, which facilitates WOC and their IP and product.... They were just butt hurt that he was able to assemble the various originating authors when they couldn't.
But in this lawsuit happy world we live in, you can sue anyone for anything .... logic and reason to be determined later... *snark*
For all you Greyhawkers following along....
>Casey's Work>http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product...icial-Living-Greyhawk-Bandit-Kingdoms-Summary
The sad thing about that is after Gary's ex wife sold TSR to the Dille Family Trust, the people who own the Buck rogers IP, and Gary was forced out of the company he wrote a new RPG called Dangerous Journeys: Mythus which was quite good even if it has some undeniable flaws. In particular the magic system was far ahead of its time. But Lorraine Williams, head of the Dille Trust and at the time Ceo or some such of TSR, sued Gary over the game claiming it was too close to D&D even though it wasn't. It drained Gary of cash and kept him from releasing product until he finally had to settle and the settlement included turning over rights to the game to TSR who promptly shelved it to never see the light of day again simply out of spite since it is well known Lorraine hated the hippy Gary.
Dark Lord Galen
Well-known member
Yep.. Dangerous Journeys had great possibilities, and was one of several that got shelved because of lawsuits you speak of....And worst of all, Lorraine / Bloom TSR took no account to the end user base....Thinking only of what they thought best, and now how the industry could grow as a whole (a rising tide raises all boats). Soon to follow TSR became a "partnership (lol funny every time I think of that) with a card game that knew nothing about RPG and its users... Only to later be "absorbed and forgotten.. thus is Lorraine's legacy...
My beloved Greyhawk suffers a similar fate at the hand of Hazbro by proxy to Lorraine's shortsightedness.. even when a group of us tried to outright purchase the IP..... they would rather let it sit collecting dust and cannibalizing its corpse by repurposing pieces and shoe-horning them into Forgotten Realms where they NEVER WHERE...... huff huff..GURRREE HOWLLLLL. now you did it KB... you inadvertently awoke the beast known as the disdain of Lorraine and WOC... MAWAAHHAAAHAHA...
Back... Back in the cage of despair you beast!....
The only words I would say are certainly not fit for the "younglings here" hehe BJ would be sending me a nasty note even though I'd be right.....
Suffice to say... In the interests of trying to be the only company to offer RGP... they forgot the endproduct user will have the last say...
And now all these years Later, My friends Eric Mona, Wolfgang Baur, Monty Cook, Gary Holan, Anna Meyer and many others are being recognized as industry leaders in spite of the past (and present) shortsighted bureaucracy. Why, because they listened to the people who use the products.
DLG
Dark Lord Galen
Well-known member
So to get the thread Semi- back on track... for any looking for back history of the original works of MANY of the "NEW" forgotten Realms published materials (and many more "Stolen" pieces to come) one only has to look as far as The World of Greyhawk.... and change the names to protect the ignorant.... because WOC/Hazbro hopes you don't notice the regurgitation...
DLG
DLG