[freeroleplay] Re: Game mechanics copyright status on debian-legal
- From: Ricardo Gladwell <president@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: freeroleplay@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 15:59:44 +0100
Samuel Penn wrote:
On Tuesday 30 August 2005 15:06, Ricardo Gladwell wrote:
Alternatively, we may be able to convince other existing FOSS legal
defence funds to cover us.
The latter is probably the best, though I don't see much of a need at
the moment. The sort of games that are part of the FRPGC seem to be
significantly different from d20 and the like to be relatively safe.
The problem with the later is that many such groups may be reluctant, if
not openly hostile, to the idea of supporting mere free content. We may
find that we have sort something out for ourselves, should we ever reach
enough critical mass to even start thinking about this.
I would also note that Jerry's FRP 'Gods and Monsters' is compatible
with second edition AD&D. I'm sure he will have some insights into this
discussion.
That's what the UK people running a BitTorrent thought, until they got
served with notices by the MPAA.
Good point.
IANAL, but I'm still sceptical that Wizard's of the Coast, unlike the
MPAA, have a lot of money to throw at frivolous law suits, despite their
posturing and bluster. We have to remember that WotC is a just a smaller
subsidiary of Hasbro, and that D&D is an even smaller (and probably not
all that profitable) subsidiary thereof. From what I know of large
corporations, I'm not sure Hasbro HQ would be happy if WotC started
expensive legal proceedings against fans left, right and centre.
One also cannot ignore the fact that the threat of legal action is a
useful and legal means of restricting otherwise legitimate behaviour.
Whether any actual legal action will be forthcoming remains to be seen
(one should note that, despite multiple infringement of D&D copyright,
no-one has been taken to court as of date).
One should also note that if WotC really thought they had a strong case
as they claim, they wouldn't include specific provisions in the OGL to
protect game mechanics and prohibit claiming compatibility with d20 and D&D.
Not that I endorse the idea that one should do anything to risk legal
action, only that the threat of legal recriminations should not be used
to censor those who are only exercising their legal rights.
The (legal aid) defence lawyers did
more to harm the defendant's case than the prosecution did...
That's kinda what I thought. Still, some defence is better than no defence.
I vaguely remember the legal case against Gygax by TSR, which sued him for
copyright infringement (or something) for games he wrote after leaving
TSR. Some of the points they listed were things such as 'using dice as
randomisers'.
LOL. Interesting, as I recall it was settled out of court. I also recall
a similar case of Palladium suing fans for creating rules for converting
Paladium characters to D&D. I think they settled out of court as well.
By that argument, you could write a game that does the same thing
as long as you don't use any of the original text. There's definitely
a lot of precedent for this - how many game systems are there which
use six attributes, hitpoints, classes and levels?
That was my point as well, but lack of legal precedent and legal action
is not, apparently, evidence that something is legal. I would argue that
the industry largely agrees that attributes, hit points, and all the
other elements we take for granted in RPGs are public domain and not
copyrightable.
Kind regards...
--
Ricardo Gladwell
President, Free RPG Community
http://www.freeroleplay.org/
president@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Other related posts:
