Actually from what I know of how the copyright/IP laws work with software
(and most computer hardware) is that they can't have a valid claim that
somebody else 'stole' their spell, system, or program if the other party has
all original code (or code borrowed from another source with permission)
despite cosmetic in-play similarities. This has court precedence in Bleem (a
playstation emulator for the pc) since Bleem itself is just an engine and
not the ROMs of games. Sony sued the creators of Bleem and lost as the
courts decided that an emulator was legal as long as it didn't use any of
the software code of the original. The other thing that helped was Bleem was
all software that emulated the hardware and software of a playstation. A
word generally can not be trademarked except within the context its used
(trademarks are grouped according to industry so the same word/phrase can be
trademarked in different industries by different people) and in a specific
font/graphic format. A word cannot be copywritten, only a full body of work.
So if you use a stat called strength to avoid confusion make sure your
description of it is not a copy of the D&D explanation of the stat. If you
use a gold dragon don't copy the stats from the Monster Manual or use the
same description and then you have your own creature that is called a gold
dragon and not the D&D gold dragon. In both cases if you were to do a copy
of the descriptions of strength or gold dragon then you'd be liable for
copyright infringement since you reproduced copywritten material (the
descriptions with the name not the name itself). The other issue for what
you can do or not do is also based on the license you attach to the MUD. If
you use the d20 SRD and OGL then you have to abide by those restrictions
beyond the lettter of the law since using the license is considered entering
into a contract that means you agree to follow the terms of the
contract/license.
----
Kele / G'razel / Sritthh-Kahal / Hermaphroditee
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of John Robert
Arras
Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2001 1:22 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Ogf-l] Re: OGL and MUDs
On Tues, May 8 2001 muphicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But they can do this anyway.... Without making the mud open
> content or releasing under GNU there is no way people can
> just take your ideas and make a mud of there own.
Sure they could. If your MUD is open for players, people
can walk in, see an idea, and go code it for themselves.
This is exactly what happens. Players play at a place for
a long time and learn how it works, then they get sick of it
and go create their own (better) version of it using the
ideas they saw in the first place.
> By releasing it under OGC this would ensure people could
> take my ideas and reuse them... Without OGC in fact with no
> licence at all people should not reuse content, ok so they will
> and I would not be that bothered if they did, but some people
> would!
I'm not talking about out and out copying word for word, I am
talking about reusing ideas in different ways. It seems like
you're saying that ideas can be copyrighted, so if someone
sees an idea (as a player, let's say), they can't go to
their own MUD and implement the same or a similar idea?
> Yes people may just make everything PI but then it in effect
> would be anyway.
> The down side to your argument is that I would not be
> able to use any of the spells or monsters from D&D since
> I am only allowed to use them under OGC!
Are you saying that I could not have a stat called
"strength" or a spell called "fireball" or a monster
called "a gold dragon"...even if the mechanics of each
thing were my own implementations...without being under
the OGC? And since almost all MUDs are going to use ideas
like this that found their origins in D&D someplace in the
distant past, will all of these MUDs all of a sudden have
to come under this new licensing system?
> Besides if I don't release under OGC it would be GNU
> like most muds and drivers are released under.. You will
> not find many muds that are released without a licence and
> by simply stealing ideas/code you would be in violation,
> ok so nobody would generally complain, but releasing under
> OGC would let people know they CAN steal bits.
Almost no MUD engines are under GPL. They are generally under
licenses that allow people to modify and redistribute, but don't
allow commercial use. Unfortunately, that means they
aren't compatible with the GPL either.
So, you keep talking about stealing ideas...are you saying that
if I go to a MUD and log in and see a spell called "Super Death
Spell" which has a certain percentage chance of killing someone,
I could not go and make my own version of that spell by taking the
idea and using it myself?
John
_______________________________________________
Ogf-l mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
_______________________________________________
Ogf-l mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
