Re: [Ogf-l] Opening Closed Games
Robert said, but what about data tables that are purely formula based that have no use outside of the application of the rule that references the table. You are correct that the underlying formula cannot be copyrighted. You can reverse engineer the tables legally still (even in the US), but as you said yourself, be prepared to fend off a lawsuit. Rightly or wrongly, the original game designer may try to get his way in court no matter whose side law and precedent are on. -Tom Caudron ___ Ogf-l mailing list Ogf-l@mail.opengamingfoundation.org http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
Re: [Ogf-l] Opening Closed Games
In my non-lawyer opinion, I would suggest that youdo you own thing rather than try to resurrect theseworks. With that most important thing said, let meoffer some suggestions to you.Are you sure the author is the original copyrightholder? If he created the game as a "work for hire" then he might not own the game, the originalcompany would. Of course, if that company doesnot survive, then the ownership would probably revert to him/her.Personally, I feel that copyright law in our countryhas a problem in that an out-of-print book cannotbe printed by anyone but the copyright holder.I personally feel that an out-of-print book shouldbe reproducible for private use only. But that is notthe law.I'd suggest that you start from scratch and create agame with the same flavor but that does not violatethe original author's protected material.Mark --Mark WilkinsonTower Ravens[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Sep 6, 2006, at 8:29 PM, Exile In Paradise wrote:Dear Open Game Gurus,I would like to discuss a real-world issue I amwrestling with.I am a collector and fan of a game system publishedfrom 1980-1994 by a publisher that is long sincegone. Last year, in an net forum, the copyrightholder himself stated that he has no interest in the"games" anymore, but is continuing to develop the"setting" for his own undisclosed purposes.The original publisher has been approached severaltimes since 1994 and asked if they would considerreleasing the games as (in order) public domain,GNU open documents, Creative Commons, and OpenGame License. Each time, and for each license idea,the answer has been "no" or silence.Meanwhile, every (rare) newcomer to the game asksthe same three questions:FAQ#1: "who owns the copyrights?"FAQ#2: "where can I get the books?"And when they find the books are so rare theynever even appear on eBay anymore, the famous:FAQ#3: "can someone send me PDFs of the books?"With the publishers own admission of apathy regardingthe "games", and being tired of not being able to fully discuss or republish parts of the games atwhim, the idea has occurred to me to try to write,publish, and distribute Open Game versions of thecopyrighted games.The setting and trademarks are not considered here.The setting is unmistakable anyway, so its a giventhat a new setting that allowed the same situationswould have to be created. Also, its a given that allartwork and trademark terms would have to be avoidedlike the plague. The name of the company and some oftheir product names are some of those very termswhich is why they are not listed here.For years the Linux software community has excelledat opening "closed" software... by recreating theclosed program as a work/play-alike open version andreleasing that. The excellent FreeCiv project is one example of many... its a look and play alike version of thecopyrighted game "Civilization" by Sid Meier.I am wondering if the same ideas the Linux folkshave used would work for opening closed/out-of-printtabletop games? The OSRIC project leads me to believe so.Here's my thinking that I hope you can all providea sanity check for:According to a U.S. Patent and Trademark Officememo (FL-108), game "rules" cannot be copyright,only the specific "_expression_" of the rules. Myunderstanding is that the difference is this: Therules to a game like baseball cannot be copyright.Only my specific description of baseball rulescan be. Anyone else is still free to write theirown description of the same game in their ownwords.So, if I go line by line through the text, and rewrite the "mechanics" into my own words, andreorganize the whole thing (based on my ownprejudice of how it should have been written ;)I should be able to release the result to theweb under an open game license and be reasonablysure I haven't actually broken any law?I realize I could still be exposed to a lawsuitfor doing so since Americans can sue each otherfor no reason at all, much less with cause, butif my understandings of things are correct, Ishould have a fair chance of winning my side ofthe case should it come to open legal battle.If this whole house of cards still stands up,then there are some specific places that arenot very clear that I could use some advice on.One is numeric data in tables. The game I aminterested in "opening" is heavily based on numerictables. I realize I can't copy them verbatim, butthe table data is part of what makes the mechanicswork. For example, if I want to check to see if someonehas scored a hit during an attack, I have tocross-reference the tables to find part of the result.So, are the tables considered *mechanics* or part ofthe rules then?Also, what are the issues around reducing the tablesdown to formula through regression or other analysis,and then using the formula to recreate the tables?If you can prove you have the formula, does it helpin court?An example of this issue would be the ExperiencePoints table from a popular fantasy game.I have seen several formula published that willexactly re-create the XP table.
Re: [Ogf-l] Opening Closed Games
Robert- I guess I have two answers to your question: 1. Does the license allow you to recreate content like that? Theoretically it does. Presuming you are smart enough to not use trademarks, etc, the sticking point for you is this: 5.Representation of Authority to Contribute: If You are contributing original material as Open Game Content, You represent that Your Contributions are Your original creation and/or You have sufficient rights to grant the rights conveyed by this License. The question is what does original creation mean? Does this term have some additional meaning beyond the creation required for normal copyright law? Certainly, to some extent, this is not your original creation. It is a willful duplication of existing content that you would have no way to create and no reason to create if the actual original content didnt exist before yours. I'm sure you understand the contrary argument. 2. Even if the license does allow it, should you do it? I say no. I wouldnt. Maybe I am misreading your post, but I feel you are trying to find some emotional justification for what you are doing by stating that newbies want the content, the content is hard to get, it would just be gotten illegally anyway, the publisher has no interest in the games. It sounds like the real reason you want to do this is that you are tired of not being able to fully discuss or republish parts of the games at whim. Well, you dont own the content. The one with the right to have a whim as to what to do with the material is the content owner, which isnt you. The bottom line is the owner has said no to using licenses to release his content. So, presumably, he wouldnt want you doing so. I personally wouldnt hold up the OSRIC project as a good example. I think there are big problems with it and wouldnt touch it with a 10 ft (or, in ODD terms, a 10') pole. I appreciate the legal question of the use of the license. I think that is the most dangerous possible use of the license. You are trying to use the license to do soemthing it wasnt designed to do, IMHO. Plus, as I have raised before, there is what you CAN do and what you SHOULD do. Clark --- Exile In Paradise [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dear Open Game Gurus, I would like to discuss a real-world issue I am wrestling with. I am a collector and fan of a game system published from 1980-1994 by a publisher that is long since gone. Last year, in an net forum, the copyright holder himself stated that he has no interest in the games anymore, but is continuing to develop the setting for his own undisclosed purposes. The original publisher has been approached several times since 1994 and asked if they would consider releasing the games as (in order) public domain, GNU open documents, Creative Commons, and Open Game License. Each time, and for each license idea, the answer has been no or silence. Meanwhile, every (rare) newcomer to the game asks the same three questions: FAQ#1: who owns the copyrights? FAQ#2: where can I get the books? And when they find the books are so rare they never even appear on eBay anymore, the famous: FAQ#3: can someone send me PDFs of the books? With the publishers own admission of apathy regarding the games, and being tired of not being able to fully discuss or republish parts of the games at whim, the idea has occurred to me to try to write, publish, and distribute Open Game versions of the copyrighted games. The setting and trademarks are not considered here. The setting is unmistakable anyway, so its a given that a new setting that allowed the same situations would have to be created. Also, its a given that all artwork and trademark terms would have to be avoided like the plague. The name of the company and some of their product names are some of those very terms which is why they are not listed here. For years the Linux software community has excelled at opening closed software... by recreating the closed program as a work/play-alike open version and releasing that. The excellent FreeCiv project is one example of many... its a look and play alike version of the copyrighted game Civilization by Sid Meier. I am wondering if the same ideas the Linux folks have used would work for opening closed/out-of-print tabletop games? The OSRIC project leads me to believe so. Here's my thinking that I hope you can all provide a sanity check for: According to a U.S. Patent and Trademark Office memo (FL-108), game rules cannot be copyright, only the specific expression of the rules. My understanding is that the difference is this: The rules to a game like baseball cannot be copyright. Only my specific description of baseball rules can be. Anyone else is still free to write their own description of the same game in their own words. So, if I go line by line through the text, and rewrite the mechanics into my own words, and reorganize the whole thing (based on my own
Re: [Ogf-l] Opening Closed Games
On Thu, 2006-09-07 at 09:02 -0600, Mark Wilkinson wrote: In my non-lawyer opinion, I would suggest that you do you own thing rather than try to resurrect these works. HAHAHA! That is exactly what my wife said. Her: Why are you wasting time making stuff for someone else's world? Why not just write your own? Me: Um, good question. I like these games? But since she hit me with that bit of obviousness, I have not been able to really write anything that was part of someone else's universe... So, I now have a growing directory of my own things and my first for-real OGC game book seriously in production. I have several chapters o' goodness in my organizer. So, I agree with your initial thought, completely. The idea of this particular project was to create an open version of the game that could easily be shared with others, as a way to bring new players to the table for that game. Personally, I don't see this as some project with a marketable end product. I can't legally photocopy my books for others to use, as far as I know, although I assume that is commonly done. Aftermarket suppliers (such as eBay) are hardly an option anymore, since the original out-of-print books rarely show up there anymore, either. Without books, or even the way to get them anymore the game either fades away completely, goes underground as a collection of files and such shared between friends (illegally), or goes open. And the only way it will go open is if I and others sit down and recreate it. If successful, this idea could breathe new life into my large, expensive (and rare) collection of those game books from that defunct publisher. Else, if no one will ever be able to play the game again, then I might as well sell the stuff I have and get away from it. My initial direction for opening this game was to create a one-page distillation of the rules for quick reference, and/or a lite or quickstart version that could be released openly. Then, there would be *something* to give to new players for use as a game guide rather than the actual rulebooks they can't find anymore. With that most important thing said, let me offer some suggestions to you. Are you sure the author is the original copyright holder? Oh yeah. The game books are copyright in his name personally, rather than the name of the company that he published them under. If he created the game as a work for hire then he might not own the game, the original company would. That probably applies more to the original artwork and some of the included material. Of course, if that company does not survive, then the ownership would probably revert to him/her. Yep. Personally, I feel that copyright law in our country has a problem in that an out-of-print book cannot be printed by anyone but the copyright holder. Makes sense to me. It creates a real problem for people when something is essentially abandonware, but the original creator can't even be bothered to release it to the public domain or under some mostly-free license early. I personally feel that an out-of-print book should be reproducible for private use only. But that is not the law. That is as I understand it too. I'd suggest that you start from scratch and create a game with the same flavor but that does not violate the original author's protected material. That's what I thought I suggested to the group to rewrite all of the rules in our own words. The tables that the rules reference are a second sticking point, but the core mechanics could be recreated? At no point has anyone interested in this project considered or suggested re-using any of the trademark terms, images, etc. People have volunteered to create new artwork and such to build around. -- Robert Exile In Paradise Murphey briefcase, n: A trial where the jury gets together and forms a lynching party. ___ Ogf-l mailing list Ogf-l@mail.opengamingfoundation.org http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
Re: [Ogf-l] Opening Closed Games
Or I may get disgusted with the whole sorry state of copyright affairs related to a dead and gone game company and chuck the whole idea. I am not a lawyer and never really wanted to be. I cant stand this comment. It isnt for YOU to decide if the game is dead and what can or cant be done with it. That game is owned by the creator, not you. There is no sorry state of copyright affairs. What there are are some problems caused by new open licenses and people trying to jam content that isnt theirs into those licenses. Perhaps what you meant is that copyright as to games is still a pretty grey area. We have some statements of general principles (cant copyright games, just the specific expression) but not a ton of guidance as to what that exactly means in any given situation. So perhaps I am overreacting to your comment. Clark __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ Ogf-l mailing list Ogf-l@mail.opengamingfoundation.org http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
Re: [Ogf-l] Opening Closed Games
Dang. See what happens when the list comes to life? On 9/6/06, Exile In Paradise [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dear Open Game Gurus, I would like to discuss a real-world issue I am wrestling with. Robert, you need one of three things: (1) A statement from the copyright holder that your rules-only work is not infringing, (2) A lawyer who will take a retainer to defend your new game as legally distinct, or (3) an acceptance of possibly losing your house in a lawsuit. The OGL, like the GPL, can do nothing to help you do something with someone else's work. Freeciv could just have easily have been a closed-source game, with regards to it actually being written. Copylefft works great forward-going -- but it doesn't do anything the other way. As to your actual problem -- you'll find some on this list who say it's entirelly legal (it is kind of), and others who say a game has a distinct legally protectable character copyright (it doesn't really [all the time], but you'll need a lawyer to prove it.) If you do decide to re-write this game you wish, I'd hope you will use the OGL. Unless you're writing for an established game that prohibits it, there's no reason not to use the OGL. DM ___ Ogf-l mailing list Ogf-l@mail.opengamingfoundation.org http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
Re: [Ogf-l] Opening Closed Games
On 6 Sep 2006 at 21:29, Exile In Paradise wrote: Dear Open Game Gurus, I would like to discuss a real-world issue I am wrestling with. I am a collector and fan of a game system published from 1980-1994 by a publisher that is long since gone. First and foremost, you need to retain the services of a lawyer who specializes in copyright trademark issues. You are quite likely going to need one. While game rules themselves are not copyrightable, tables are NOT game rules. They may be a specific expression of a game rule, but they are not rules themselves, and are thus copyrightable. Any attempts to recreate those tables, or to create new tables that are similar in look, feel, and use could be considered the creation of a derivative work, and thus a copyright violation. It doesn't matter if you are attempting to fix a flaw in the tables or not, the end result is going to be what matters here. TANSTAAFL Rasyr (Tim Dugger) System Editor Iron Crown Enterprises - http://www.ironcrown.com E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Ogf-l mailing list Ogf-l@mail.opengamingfoundation.org http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
