Kalamar and Others under 4E
So some developments on the GSL front. I mentioned in my last GSL post about the option of publishing material that is compatible with 4E or other game systems without reproducing copyrighted material.
Kenzerco released their Kingdoms of Kalamar setting yesterday without the GSL, as announced in a forum thread, "4E Kingdoms of Kalamar PDF released". The 501 page PDF is available now in color, with a 16 page PDF preview for free. Cover below:
So the cover clearly shows that it is not released under the GSL, since it states "for use with Fourth Edition Dungeons & Dragons" on the front -- when GSL products can only use a specific graphic on the back corner. Also, GSL products cannot be released until October 1st. In the Kenzerco forums, David Kenzer explained in a forum post: Correct, we no longer have an agreement with Wizards. Why? Is there some "magic" restriction in IP law that restricts people from making new creative material that doesn't use any TMs, patents or copyrights of another company?
Oh, perhaps it's the magical FUD rule that you're referring to?
By-the-by, KoK first appeared in 1994 and we had no formal relationship with TSR.
Kalamar's Content
So how does this work with respect to Intellectual Property laws?
It does cite the trademarked D&D name on the front cover, though not the distinctive logo. In principle, it is legal to indicate compatibility with another product as long as you do not represent yourself as being that other product. Specific to the game world, it has been established that you can create games to run on other people's platforms. See Galoob v. Nintendo (1992) which found that the Game Genie could work on Nintendo and advertise this fact without their permission. Similarly, Sega v. Accolade (1992) showed that third parties could make compatible games for the Sega, even if they had to reverse-engineer the interface. Some of their design methods were later closed by the DMCA, but that's irrelevant to tabletop RPGs.
As far as copyright goes... From the preview, it appears that Kalamar has very little copyrighted material from any of the 4E books, and indeed has little rules material in general within its 501 pages. According to a table on page 5, there are 3 new animals, 4 new equipment items, 3 new magic items, 1 new race, 1 new spell, and 1 new feat. Notably, there are no new classes -- which are more distinctive of the 4th edition. Feats as such are somewhat distinctive of third edition and its derivatives -- and Kalamar doesn't appear to be under the OGL, since open content isn't mentioned in the credits page.
For comparison, below on the left is the Kalamar half-hobgoblin racial summary from the free preview, while on the right is the 4E half-elf racial summary.
In the TSR era, some attempted to claim that the format of monster stats was protected by copyright -- even if someone was making up an entirely new monster. This seems unlikely, and as far as I know there is no precedent for it. However, it is the only way that I can see to suggest a copyright violation.
Legal Discussion
There is naturally a lot of discussion going on about this, as it has implications beyond D&D if other companies take a similar approach. On WotC's GSL forum, two main threads are "First 3PP going around GSL?" and "Quite the little rebellion going on". On theRPGsite, there is a thread on "Kalamar 4E Released!". Most interestingly, the RPGPundit has a blog post "The GSL: An Oncoming Storm" where in the comment thread, Ryan Dancey argued over several posts that copyright law should prevent creating unlicensed compatible supplements, while Simon Newman and others disagreed.
Regarding copyright, the positions are a bit closer than they might first appear. Even Dancey apparently admits that (1) stat blocks for newly-created monsters; and (2) simple stat blocks for public-domain monsters such as goblins; are both legal. Everyone agrees that a rulebook that reproduces the whole of the D&D system would be infringing on copyrighted creative expression even if there was no direct quoting. There also seems to be agreement that even the stat block on a distinct monster like a beholder or a particular devil type would be copyrightable. However, Dancey argues that copyrighted stat blocks and monsters are key. There are a lot of public domain creatures in the Monster Manual (although a lot less in the 4E book if what I hear is accurate). You could easily make a simple "dungeon crawl" adventure that consisted of a map, keyed to a list of monsters found in each room, and probably even basic treasure just by referencing those public domain creatures, and there's little or nothing anyone could do about it. But that would be boring, and other than as an intellectual excersize, not worth much. When you start bringing in spells, magic items, interesting opponents with variant abilities and equipment, etc. you walk right into the gray zone.
There was less discussion of trademark. In the RPGPundit's comments, Stuart did cite a NY Times article regarding a razor company that successfully defended its right to include a sticker on its blades saying "All Parason Flexor and Gillette Sensor handles are compatible with this blade." Still, they were sued over the use of that label, so it seems like it is a potential gray area.
As I understand it, trademarks must be defended to be valid. Thus, between now and October when the GSL products become possible, there should be news regarding Kalamar. If WotC has not taken action, that makes it less likely that they can successfully take up a case against Kenzer or others later.
Other Companies
In addition to Kenzerco, Adamant Entertainment and Goodman Games have both announced products that they identify as being for "4E" that will be released before October 1st. In a post on Sunday, Joseph Goodman said: For those of you who are wondering about today's news post: yes, those products really will be available before October 1. I generally don't discuss business in public forums but because there will be questions, I am posting here to confirm yes, it is true, as is the blurb in the back of yesterday's Free RPG Day release. 'Nuff said... now enjoy reading about Punjar with the freebies from yesterday. :)
On the non-commercial side, Wolfgang Baur included GSL comments as part of his open-design project. In a D&D GSL forum thread, "Fair use vs GSL", Sigfried Trent looked at his non-GSL options as publisher of the Netbook of Feats.
caesarslaad wrote a post on "More GSL and OGL Stuff", where he gives more details on planned 4E releases.
4E SRD?
As part of my SRD Collection project, I'd be interested in creating and host a "4E SRD". This would be useful in encouraging OGL development in the 4E era, as opposed to non-OGL and non-GSL compatible works.
A 4E SRD would be an original system based on previous OGL open-content work, including the original fantasy SRD, the modern SRD, the Action SRD, the runic SRD, and perhaps open content from others such as the World of Warcraft RPG. It would not replicate the recently-released commercial 4E game, but would only be similar enough that a new monster or new class for the 4E SRD should be also usable for the commercial 4E game.
To distinguish itself, I think this should be non-genre-specific and highly flexible. That is, an NPC or monster from the closed-source game should be valid in the SRD. However, the SRD may have many many options that are not possible under the closed-source game. For example, I picture using the broad skills from FATE3; the fixed skill bonuses from the True SRD; and Action Points merged from the Modern SRD and the Action SRD.
Kenzerco released their Kingdoms of Kalamar setting yesterday without the GSL, as announced in a forum thread, "4E Kingdoms of Kalamar PDF released". The 501 page PDF is available now in color, with a 16 page PDF preview for free. Cover below:
So the cover clearly shows that it is not released under the GSL, since it states "for use with Fourth Edition Dungeons & Dragons" on the front -- when GSL products can only use a specific graphic on the back corner. Also, GSL products cannot be released until October 1st. In the Kenzerco forums, David Kenzer explained in a forum post: Correct, we no longer have an agreement with Wizards. Why? Is there some "magic" restriction in IP law that restricts people from making new creative material that doesn't use any TMs, patents or copyrights of another company?
Oh, perhaps it's the magical FUD rule that you're referring to?
By-the-by, KoK first appeared in 1994 and we had no formal relationship with TSR.
Kalamar's Content
So how does this work with respect to Intellectual Property laws?
It does cite the trademarked D&D name on the front cover, though not the distinctive logo. In principle, it is legal to indicate compatibility with another product as long as you do not represent yourself as being that other product. Specific to the game world, it has been established that you can create games to run on other people's platforms. See Galoob v. Nintendo (1992) which found that the Game Genie could work on Nintendo and advertise this fact without their permission. Similarly, Sega v. Accolade (1992) showed that third parties could make compatible games for the Sega, even if they had to reverse-engineer the interface. Some of their design methods were later closed by the DMCA, but that's irrelevant to tabletop RPGs.
As far as copyright goes... From the preview, it appears that Kalamar has very little copyrighted material from any of the 4E books, and indeed has little rules material in general within its 501 pages. According to a table on page 5, there are 3 new animals, 4 new equipment items, 3 new magic items, 1 new race, 1 new spell, and 1 new feat. Notably, there are no new classes -- which are more distinctive of the 4th edition. Feats as such are somewhat distinctive of third edition and its derivatives -- and Kalamar doesn't appear to be under the OGL, since open content isn't mentioned in the credits page.
For comparison, below on the left is the Kalamar half-hobgoblin racial summary from the free preview, while on the right is the 4E half-elf racial summary.
In the TSR era, some attempted to claim that the format of monster stats was protected by copyright -- even if someone was making up an entirely new monster. This seems unlikely, and as far as I know there is no precedent for it. However, it is the only way that I can see to suggest a copyright violation.
Legal Discussion
There is naturally a lot of discussion going on about this, as it has implications beyond D&D if other companies take a similar approach. On WotC's GSL forum, two main threads are "First 3PP going around GSL?" and "Quite the little rebellion going on". On theRPGsite, there is a thread on "Kalamar 4E Released!". Most interestingly, the RPGPundit has a blog post "The GSL: An Oncoming Storm" where in the comment thread, Ryan Dancey argued over several posts that copyright law should prevent creating unlicensed compatible supplements, while Simon Newman and others disagreed.
Regarding copyright, the positions are a bit closer than they might first appear. Even Dancey apparently admits that (1) stat blocks for newly-created monsters; and (2) simple stat blocks for public-domain monsters such as goblins; are both legal. Everyone agrees that a rulebook that reproduces the whole of the D&D system would be infringing on copyrighted creative expression even if there was no direct quoting. There also seems to be agreement that even the stat block on a distinct monster like a beholder or a particular devil type would be copyrightable. However, Dancey argues that copyrighted stat blocks and monsters are key. There are a lot of public domain creatures in the Monster Manual (although a lot less in the 4E book if what I hear is accurate). You could easily make a simple "dungeon crawl" adventure that consisted of a map, keyed to a list of monsters found in each room, and probably even basic treasure just by referencing those public domain creatures, and there's little or nothing anyone could do about it. But that would be boring, and other than as an intellectual excersize, not worth much. When you start bringing in spells, magic items, interesting opponents with variant abilities and equipment, etc. you walk right into the gray zone.
There was less discussion of trademark. In the RPGPundit's comments, Stuart did cite a NY Times article regarding a razor company that successfully defended its right to include a sticker on its blades saying "All Parason Flexor and Gillette Sensor handles are compatible with this blade." Still, they were sued over the use of that label, so it seems like it is a potential gray area.
As I understand it, trademarks must be defended to be valid. Thus, between now and October when the GSL products become possible, there should be news regarding Kalamar. If WotC has not taken action, that makes it less likely that they can successfully take up a case against Kenzer or others later.
Other Companies
In addition to Kenzerco, Adamant Entertainment and Goodman Games have both announced products that they identify as being for "4E" that will be released before October 1st. In a post on Sunday, Joseph Goodman said: For those of you who are wondering about today's news post: yes, those products really will be available before October 1. I generally don't discuss business in public forums but because there will be questions, I am posting here to confirm yes, it is true, as is the blurb in the back of yesterday's Free RPG Day release. 'Nuff said... now enjoy reading about Punjar with the freebies from yesterday. :)
On the non-commercial side, Wolfgang Baur included GSL comments as part of his open-design project. In a D&D GSL forum thread, "Fair use vs GSL", Sigfried Trent looked at his non-GSL options as publisher of the Netbook of Feats.
caesarslaad wrote a post on "More GSL and OGL Stuff", where he gives more details on planned 4E releases.
4E SRD?
As part of my SRD Collection project, I'd be interested in creating and host a "4E SRD". This would be useful in encouraging OGL development in the 4E era, as opposed to non-OGL and non-GSL compatible works.
A 4E SRD would be an original system based on previous OGL open-content work, including the original fantasy SRD, the modern SRD, the Action SRD, the runic SRD, and perhaps open content from others such as the World of Warcraft RPG. It would not replicate the recently-released commercial 4E game, but would only be similar enough that a new monster or new class for the 4E SRD should be also usable for the commercial 4E game.
To distinguish itself, I think this should be non-genre-specific and highly flexible. That is, an NPC or monster from the closed-source game should be valid in the SRD. However, the SRD may have many many options that are not possible under the closed-source game. For example, I picture using the broad skills from FATE3; the fixed skill bonuses from the True SRD; and Action Points merged from the Modern SRD and the Action SRD.