|
4 years ago ::
Aug 04, 2009 - 3:53AM
#51
|
|
|
I did enough research into copyright and trademarks during the two and a half years I was part of a game design group. So while I'm not a lawyer, I do know my rights when it comes to copyright and the creative commons license I prefer to use for non-profit IP. I also know enough to know what WotC is allowed to copyright as well.
There is no ambiguity about the copyright WotC is slapping on the bottom of every monster created with the monster builder. Taken literally, which is the only way to take copyright, it copyrights the entire monster. You're a fool if you continue to post monsters with that copyright attached. You're giving the monster to WotC when they do that and they have no reason or obligation to compensate you for it if they use it in a published product.
So, no you are not a copyright lawyer. Saying I did some research probably means you went to wikipedia.
I on the other hand, actually work with copyrights, apply for copyrights for my work and have taken classes on copyright laws.
So I'm not a lawyer, but I work with copyrights, as part of what I do for a living.
And you sir, don't know what you are talking about.
Do what you want with your stuff. But stop talking like you are right.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Aug 04, 2009 - 8:40AM
#52
|
Date Joined:
Aug 21, 2007
|
BTW, people, it's copyRIGHT, as in "The RIGHT to make COPIES."
This has been your Spelling Nazi alert for the day.
Earth Delta!! Post-atomic mutants using D&D 4e rules. 600+ pages of mutations, monsters, and occasional sarcasm.
Alma Mater review and walkthrough!A look at the infamous early-80s High School RPG, with illustrations by the great Erol Otus.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Aug 04, 2009 - 12:29PM
#53
|
Date Joined:
Jun 25, 2008
|
So, no you are not a copyright lawyer. Saying I did some research probably means you went to wikipedia.
No, I researched it far more thoroughly than that. I also researched creative commons licenses and other such tools.
And you sir, don't know what you are talking about
********. There's nothing ambiguous about the copyright WotC is slapping on every monster produced with the monster builder. It very clearly gives them copyright ownership of that monster.
But stop talking like you are right.
I am right. Prove me wrong.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Aug 04, 2009 - 1:12PM
#54
|
|
|
Currently, copyright laws in regards to software, favors the creator of the software, not the user. You don't own any of the software you buy from a company, you own the rights to use that software.
Just like in online games, any thing you do in the game is still owned by the game makers. Unlike in in China and Japan, were digital items are considered by society and law, owned by the person that owns the account.
You are using their software to create something within the software, limited by the software and the data they provide. In other words, while you are coming up with ideas, you are using their data, which is ownable by a company, to manipulate the software, and make something.
It all starts with their data, and that's what it basically comes down with. Programs like photoshop, require you to supply your own data, image sources, whatever. There is the difference.
Now, there is a gray area with the Monster Builder, is that you can seem to supply your own data. But it can be argued that the amount of your own data supplied is limited. Most monsters will probably start off as a preloaded monster, and be altered. Who's monster is it then?
And that's why you are wrong.
I'm not saying this is morally right, I'm saying this is how things legally stand in America. I am not interested in debating the legal morality of this. If you think the laws need to be changed, get off the DnD forums and get to work on that.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Aug 04, 2009 - 1:57PM
#55
|
Date Joined:
Jun 25, 2008
|
It all starts with their data, and that's what it basically comes down with. Programs like photoshop, require you to supply your own data, image sources, whatever. There is the difference.
Wrong. I can enter zero data in photoshop and come up with a contential outline for a world map. All information is done by manipulating the tool, aka the software. I didn't DRAW anything. Just used sliders and filters and levels and all that jazz to make an image. Does that mean Adobe owns that image because I didn't draw it myself?
I don't think so.
Now, there is a gray area with the Monster Builder, is that you can seem to supply your own data. But it can be argued that the amount of your own data supplied is limited. Most monsters will probably start off as a preloaded monster, and be altered. Who's monster is it then?
I don't use monsters or powers that already exist. Any monster I've created that wasn't already copyright by someone else, like slivers or something, was created from scratch.
And that's why you are wrong.
That's why I'm right.
I'm not saying this is morally right, I'm saying this is how things legally stand in America. I am not interested in debating the legal morality of this. If you think the laws need to be changed, get off the DnD forums and get to work on that.
You first. The laws work just fine for me as is. WotC cannot claim any copyright on my monsters. If I create a monster named the Jilvanawoppatalossi and do not use any existing powers. It's mine. Doesn't matter what program I used to create it.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Aug 04, 2009 - 2:40PM
#56
|
Date Joined:
Aug 13, 2007
|
Feyberry, you are just being unreasonable. Even before we hear anything back from the horses mouth.
Also I would like to know how you do an entire coastline with only fiddling a few knobs and levers. Your analogy is unsound. Your analogy is more like "If I type a book in word does MS own it? because im only using the 'tools' they provide?"
You claim to have never used any existing monsters, I disbelive you, you probably at some time saw a monster in an existing publication or a power and went "thats cool! but it could be better!". The fact that you may have read some of the MM or MM2 means you have tainted your 100% original thought process.
 Never Point a loaded party at a plot you are not willing to shoot. Arcane Rhetoric. My Blog.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Aug 04, 2009 - 3:09PM
#57
|
|
|
Wrong. I can enter zero data in photoshop and come up with a contential outline for a world map. All information is done by manipulating the tool, aka the software. I didn't DRAW anything. Just used sliders and filters and levels and all that jazz to make an image. Does that mean Adobe owns that image because I didn't draw it myself?
I don't think so.
By manipulating the tools, you are creating the data yourself, unique and original, you are not using data provided by Adobe. You are in effect, entering the data with your hand. Sorry, you are wrong. The tools don't provide the data, you do. Sorry. It's a fundamental argument of IP law that you either understand or don't. I don't think you do.
I don't use monsters or powers that already exist. Any monster I've created that wasn't already copyright by someone else, like slivers or something, was created from scratch.
Prove it. I guess you can't.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Aug 04, 2009 - 4:57PM
#58
|
Date Joined:
Aug 21, 2007
|
Wrong. I can enter zero data in photoshop and come up with a contential outline for a world map. All information is done by manipulating the tool, aka the software. I didn't DRAW anything. Just used sliders and filters and levels and all that jazz to make an image. Does that mean Adobe owns that image because I didn't draw it myself?
Nope, but if you were to say, download a picture of the Adobe symbol, and use that in your artwork, chances are you would be violating their IP copyright.
Which brings me to:
You first. The laws work just fine for me as is. WotC cannot claim any copyright on my monsters. If I create a monster named the Jilvanawoppatalossi and do not use any existing powers. It's mine. Doesn't matter what program I used to create it.
Which leads me to believe they're including that CR to cover things that are not specifically YOUR creation. Such as the formatting of the monsters, and such (like the stuff covered under the GSL.)
Which is pretty much the same as it's ever been. The numbers and "rules" are not copywritten and cannot be. The formatting can be, and probably is.
You're jumping to conclusions about what that statement covers, which is your right to do so, but it seems like a lot of extra effort to me. :P
WoTC should clarify that statement though.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Aug 04, 2009 - 5:17PM
#59
|
|
|
See, what I see is a stat block generated by the Adventure tools. The adventure tools are copyrighted.
Therefor the final product is an image created using data from the Monster Builder. Because there is no control over how the final product looks. All that comes from the tools end.
However, I doubt that WoTC is trying to lay claim to anyone's monsters, merely protect it's tools.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Aug 04, 2009 - 6:16PM
#60
|
Date Joined:
Aug 21, 2007
|
Nope, but if you were to say, download a picture of the Adobe symbol, and use that in your artwork, chances are you would be violating their IP copyright.
Actually, no -- you'd be violating their TRADEMARK, and no, it's not "the same thing".
Nothing in the stat block produced by the Monster Builder when you make a custom monster is copyrightable, unless you use some of the existing power flavor text. However, the "look and feel" of the output MAY be covered by trademark laws, esp. if there's a chance of "consumer confusion" or "dilution of value". An entire stat block from the MM may be copyrightable, as that's a complete expression of an idea -- you can't just take a WOTC RaceName NounVerber, change the name slightly, and publish it as your own creation. The exact dividing point, esp, with relatively simple monsters with many similarities, is hard to find, but I strongly suspect WOTC won't care unless someone outputs every single monster in the database then posts them to a web site.
But your own monsters, even if expressed with their mechanics? Totally not copyrightable, and if anyone makes a fuss over the layout, it should be easy enough to change the styles until they don't resembles the WOTC layout.
Remember: Game rules cannot be copyrighted -- only the specific expression of those rules. Short bits of text, such as the name of a power or the name of a monster, cannot be copyrighted. "Demogorgon" may be a trademark of WOTC, esp. in reference to "Two headed demon prince with a scorpion tail", but the concept of "two headed demon prince" cannot be copyrighted, and as long as you don't call him "Demongurgon" or something like that, there's not much to go on. If all you do is slightly change or alter some stat blocks by a character here or a modifier there, you're on shaky ground, but if you make your own monsters from the ground up, just using their formula, and do not copy any flavor text, you are probably free. The advantage of the OGL was that it gave you the right to use actual raw text which had been declared OGC; the GSL gives you no such rights, and unless you want to use the *trademarks* of WOTC, such as the logo, the specific trade dress and colors, etc, you probably don't need to worry, esp. for non-commercial works. (Copyright law applies equally regardless of whether your work is for profit, BUT, companies rarely care about non-commercial borderline cases, UNLESS, as noted above, someone is trying to do an end-run and post actual IP, in bulk, for free.)
None of the above is legal advice, and I Am Not A Lawyer.
Earth Delta!! Post-atomic mutants using D&D 4e rules. 600+ pages of mutations, monsters, and occasional sarcasm.
Alma Mater review and walkthrough!A look at the infamous early-80s High School RPG, with illustrations by the great Erol Otus.
|
|
|
