Results 11 to 14 of 14
Thread: Mongoose Publishing - Bloodline
-
05-06-2004, 10:19 AM #11
Hahaha, aint that the truth.
"Who was the first that forged the deadly blade? Of rugged steel his savage soul was made." --Tibullus
"Qui desiderat pacem praeparet bellum." --Vegetius
"Men grow tired of sleep, love, singing and dancing sooner than war." --Homer
-
05-06-2004, 05:10 PM #12
At 11:50 AM 5/6/2004 +0200, irdeggman wrote:
>OGC is different than OGL. OGC is a fairly recent concept from WotC that
>has more open application than does OGL. OGC means that anything that is
>OGC can be reused and `sold` by someone else in way desired. OGL material
>is still `owned` by the parent company and can`t be used in that manner
>although it can be referenced, etc.
From what I can tell OGC (Open Game Content) is simply stuff released
under the OGL (Open Game License.) At least, that`s how it appears to be
defined in the OGL. OGC is owned by the author but the point in
designating material OGC under the OGL is that anyone can reproduce that
material freely. "In consideration for agreeing to use this License, the
Contributors grant You a perpetual, worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive
license with the exact terms of this License to Use, the Open Game
Content." At least, that appears to be Mongoose`s understanding of the
concept as noted in one of their texts "In fact, material that is strictly
rules related is Open Content. You can use this material in your own
works, as long as you follow the conditions of the Open Game License. You
can copy the material to your website or even put it in a book that you
publish and sell." Basically, anybody can sell (or otherwise distribute)
material by identifying it as OGC, including a copy of the license, and
noting the owner of the OGC copyright.
That is, the game mechanical aspects of such a text would be useable. One
could not use the material that is Product Identity--generally, PI is
campaign material. If their write up of bloodlines contains things that
are specific to the campaign (their versions of bloodline derivations, for
instance) then Mongoose`s permission is required to reproduce that
material. However, the actual rules for bloodlines are OGC and can be
reproduced freely. The concept and game mechanics of bloodline derivations
would be OGC, but the bloodlines themselves would be PI. Generally, the
Mongoose folks tend to designate a lot more of their material OGC than
Product Identity. Nobody can say until they have the actual text, of
course, but it`s entirely possible material from that product will be
freely useable.
Which is still not to say the book will be of any use to the BR community,
however. I`ve come across lots of promos that sounded like they were going
to do a BR-like thing, but when the actual product came out the system
presented looked nothing like BR. In this case, it might be more or less
inspired by BR, but when it comes to the portrayal of a "bloodline" in a
RPG there`s really not much in the term alone that gives us a lot of hints
as to what the actual themes, rules or concepts will be.
>Again the problem is with the how Official fan site contract restrictions
>place anything posted here as joint owned by the author and WotC, well OGL
>is still owned soley by the author so what could conceivably happen is
>that `we` copy some of the Bloodlines material (assuming it is OGL and
>post it as part of the BRCS (or something similar) - well then WotC can
>claim it as their IP and `sell` it, giving credit to the BR net authors as
>joint authors, etc., etc. I think I`m going to go crazy here. . . .
So you can`t post anything that is OGC as part of the contract with WotC,
or is it that doing so would require putting a copy of the OGL and
copyright notices in the BR update?
Unless there is some additional condition in the WotC/Birthright.net
contract that says no OGL material can be used then my understanding is
that anything OGC is fair game for a BR update (or anyone else, for that
matter.) Material already defined as OGC isn`t redefined as IP because it
came out on birthright.net and IP material isn`t made OGC because it
employs OGC rules. That is, if Mongoose came up with a bloodline system
that had whole new OGC game mechanics then the BR update could use those
game mechanics as OGC, but the material produced that was BR-specific would
remain IP if properly identified in the work--which one has to do under the
OGL anyway.
Gary
-
05-06-2004, 08:48 PM #13
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- Virginia Beach, Virginia
- Posts
- 3,945
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
From the WotC site:
Q: Can a work be derived from both Open Game Content and Product Identity?
A: Yes, but since the Open Game License only gives you the right to copy, modify and distribute Open Game Content, unless you had a separate license from whomever owned the Product Identity, you cannot legally copy or distribute a work that contained such material without a separate agreement from the owners of the Product Identity
Link to the OGL Faq at WotC:
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x...lfaq/20040123f
And that gets me back to my earlier comment on lawyers. IT reminds me of trying the define the word "The" from the Clinton days.Duane Eggert
-
05-07-2004, 01:30 AM #14
At 10:48 PM 5/6/2004 +0200, irdeggman wrote:
> Q: Can a work be derived from both Open Game Content and Product Identity?
> A: Yes, but since the Open Game License only gives you the right to
> copy, modify and distribute Open Game Content, unless you had a separate
> license from whomever owned the Product Identity, you cannot legally copy
> or distribute a work that contained such material without a separate
> agreement from the owners of the Product Identity
>
> Link to the OGL Faq at WotC:
>
>
>http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x...lfaq/20040123f
>
> And that gets me back to my earlier comment on lawyers. IT reminds me of
> trying the define the word "The" from the Clinton days.
It was "...what the definition of `is` is."
In any case, the question above addresses whether you could make a product
that used BOTH the OGC and PI aspects of a work. That is, the product uses
parts of a work parts of which are designated OGC and others PI. In that
case, one has to have a special license with the owner of the PI material
because one always has to have a special license from the owner of any PI
material. If the derivative work didn`t use the PI parts, however, it
wouldn`t be a violation. Point being making part of a work OGC and part PI
does not make the whole thing OGC, and something can be designated both OGC
and PI at the same time in which case it is, basically, PI. That way
someone might identify their work by saying "The contents of this text are
OGC, and the following parts are PI" without losing the PI designation
since it is "clearly identified" (in that vague, legalistic way) as both.
The very next Q & A clarifies the important bit for use in a BR product:
Q: If I identify something as Product Identity that was previously
distributed as Open Game Content, does the material become Product Identity?
A: No. Once content has been distributed as Open Game Content, it cannot
become Product Identity, even if you are the original creator of the content.
So if they designate their bloodline system OGC and not PI it could appear
in a BR text, or anybody else`s text if released under the OGL. Such a BR
text would be both OGC and PI with the Mongoose rules OGC and the BR
materials PI, and would have to have that "clearly identified" somehow in
the text.
If one were to use Mongoose`s _Seafarer`s Handbook_ in a BR update, for
instance, everything in that book is OGC except the descriptions of races,
prestige classes, and the illustrations, pictures and diagrams. Everything
else can appear in a BR update. The rules on ship construction, the ships
used as examples, naval battles, monsters, feats, use of skills, spells,
etc. just so long as its origin is duly noted as belonging to Mongoose, the
OGL is printed in the back of the book, and which bits of the work are OGL
are "clearly identified."
Of course, that`s only relevant if they designate their bloodline material
as OGC and not PI, which they _tend_ to do a lot of, but we`ll have to see.
Gary
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks