Resources Then & Now (SRD 5.1)

[moriarty777]

With all the recent BS with regards to the OGL and the release of SRD 5.1 to Creative Commons, I decided to dive into it for a quick look.

When the OGL first came out, and thanks to the earlier SRD that came with it, enterprising hobbyists and publishers put that older SRD to good use and released upon the world a plethora of games and support material. Castles & Crusades was one of the earlier attempts and Old School Essentials being one of the most recent darlings of the OSR. And all of that is FANTASTIC.

So here's the question: The older SRD seemed to be 'heavier' in terms of content which made these efforts somewhat easier I feel. If you take that SRD out of the equation, and you have nothing left but the newer SRD, could you do as good of a job with it? Naturally, I'm not talking about mechanics -- that can't be copyrighted technically speaking. But it occurs to me that the 5.1 SRD seems a lot less useful than the SRD that came out of the 3.x era. And, with that in mind, could you basically do a Castles & Crusades, a Old School Essentials, a <insert other OGL favorite here), if you wanted to use the 5.1 SRD but stick with Creative Commons?

Thoughts?

Pat

[Fiffergrund]

I think you could do the same thing with the CC license, but depending on what is used, it might be tested legally. Wizards put less in because they want to trip up anyone who uses the CC version and not their OGL version, where they have more control. If not careful, someone could cross one of those lines and be vulnerable.

The other problem is that no one really knows where those lines are, 100%.

That's not to say I think they'd have a legal case. I'm not a lawyer, but there's a lot they claim to protect that seems fairly dubious to me.

Having said that, going after a publisher on a gray area after all of this bad publicity and finally putting it under Creative Commons...well, it might just finish them off.

TL/DR - C&C didn't need the OGL to be legal. It needed the OGL to be protected from lawfare. The same applies to the other games, unless they copied stuff from the older books whole cloth. In the balance, I think the CC with SRD 5.1 made that all a little muddier.

[Grandpa]

So here's the question: The older SRD seemed to be 'heavier' in terms of content which made these efforts somewhat easier I feel. If you take that SRD out of the equation, and you have nothing left but the newer SRD, could you do as good of a job with it? Naturally, I'm not talking about mechanics -- that can't be copyrighted technically speaking. But it occurs to me that the 5.1 SRD seems a lot less useful than the SRD that came out of the 3.x era. And, with that in mind, could you basically do a Castles & Crusades, a Old School Essentials, a <insert other OGL favorite here), if you wanted to use the 5.1 SRD but stick with Creative Commons?

C&C doesn't need an SRD. So yes, one could do just as good a job. Although C&C has no use for 5th Ed stuff.

[serleran]

Game copies existed before there was a SRD. All it did, really, was provide a reusable template/framework in which others could create their variations,. For WotC, this was intended to be "they'll make modules and the stuff we don't want to, so we can focus only on the important stuff like rules for PCs because that's what sells" but missed the whole "but these 3rd parties can make new rules too..." and, with the entire gamut of them all, probably outperformed as a class than the single products made by the OG. The next iteration sought to break that and pretty much restrict everything that could be "branded" (not exactly right since d20 had the STL which was not needed unless one actually wanted to use trade dress and claim direct compatibility instead of the ubiquitous phrases we see today) as such...

But, anyway, in the US at least, games, nor their rules and mechanics, cannot be copyrighted but specific "artistic representations" can be trademarked - this does not apply equally to digital games so, unless WotC decides to release the next iteration of D&D as purely digital, there has never even been a need for the SRD, for anybody, for any reason. It just makes things a little less sue-happy, considering the nonstop cease-and-desist that came from the late 90s with TSR suing everyone online who even attempted to "publish" a D&D item. This is generally why they got the moniker of T$R, though there are other reasons too, like... cutting costs everywhere possible and reusing materials.

[Grandpa]

But, anyway, in the US at least, games, nor their rules and mechanics, cannot be copyrighted but specific "artistic representations" can be trademarked - this does not apply equally to digital games so,

Actually most of it does apply to digital games. See "Capcom" suit mentioned herein: http://www.strebecklaw.com/wp-content/u ... 32fd0c.pdf

[paladinn]

C&C doesn't need an SRD. So yes, one could do just as good a job. Although C&C has no use for 5th Ed stuff.

Not entirely true. TL's recent "Players' Guide to Aihrde 5e" had suggestions on how to adapt some 5e-isms to C&C. Some are actually pretty useful. Not sure if/how any of it will be affected by the changes in the legalities.

[serleran]

But, anyway, in the US at least, games, nor their rules and mechanics, cannot be copyrighted but specific "artistic representations" can be trademarked - this does not apply equally to digital games so,

Actually most of it does apply to digital games. See "Capcom" suit mentioned herein: http://www.strebecklaw.com/wp-content/u ... 32fd0c.pdf

You misunderstand what was written.

I did not say "digital games cannot be copywritten or trademarked" because they can. That is what "does not apply equally" means. Or elements of them can. This is one reason why no other game has come out using the nemesis system from one of the LotR games. Or why only certain games use a specific arrangement of dialog options... digital games are a little different when it comes to IP, primarily because they are mostly visual.

[Grandpa]

I did not say "digital games cannot be copywritten or trademarked" because they can. That is what "does not apply equally" means. Or elements of them can. This is one reason why no other game has come out using the nemesis system from one of the LotR games. Or why only certain games use a specific arrangement of dialog options... digital games are a little different when it comes to IP, primarily because they are mostly visual.

The same rules for visual elements apply to both types of games. Whether static images printed on a box or pages of a module or video images. With one exception, certain movement types that are unique artistic expression are protected in video elements.