High Guard and the OGL

[Jeff Hopper]

Is it allowable to create ships using High Guard and then publish them under the OGL? I'm assuming that it would be noted in the product that High Guard was used to design the ships and that none of the design sequence text in High Guard would be reprinted in the product.

 

[dmccoy1693]

at this point in time, no. when mongoose releases a seperate srd (or adds to the existing srd) with stuff from HG, then yes, but not until then.

 

[Vile]

Well, you could do it if the finished product used only terms which are included in the current SRD. So, you would not be able to include new High Guard components like torpedoes*, but you might be able to design ships or small craft using the High Guard rules and then describe them in terms that comply with the SRD. Remember, there is nothing in the SRD which requires you to use a particular system to design ships - you could use FF&S if you like, just so long as the end result only includes generic terms or terms mentioned in the SRD.

Now, then. When is the High Guard SRD coming out? Some writers are gasping for a bit of smallcraft action! :mrgreen:

*Actually, you could use torpedoes because it is a generic term, but to do so would be immoral and we, the MGT community, would frown upon such skullduggery. :wink:

 

[aspqrz]

Well, you could do it if the finished product used only terms which are included in the current SRD.

Of course, you could use HG and SRD terms ("torpedoes") and design sequences as long as you don't use the Traveller logo, mention any copyrighted/tm'ed terms ("Vilani" or "Zhodani" for example), and don't claim specific compatibility with Traveller (MT or any other version ... "Compatible with your favourite SF Role Playing Game").

Which may well be self-defeating, depending on how perceptive potential customers may (or may not) be (i.e. will they figure out that their "favourite SF RPG" is, in fact, Traveller?) :wink:

Phil

 

[MongooseMatt]

Hi guys,

Elements of High Guard will be added to the SRD just as soon as we have a few spare moments (things are _so_ hectic here!).

 

[dmccoy1693]

Of course, you could use HG and SRD terms ("torpedoes") and design sequences as long as you don't use the Traveller logo

No you really can't. You CANNOT use stuff from HG. HG is NOT OGL. While you can use the term 'torpedo' but you had better describe it in a completely different way then HG does. But you absolutely cannot use the design sequences from HG.

As a publisher, there is one and only one Mongoose-related source you can look towards that you can use and that is the traveller SRD. All other material is strictly off limits. No exceptions. Traveller logo or not. Only possible exception is if you have another license from Mongoose specifickly allowing you to use their other material.

 

[Jeff Hopper]

Hi guys,

Elements of High Guard will be added to the SRD just as soon as we have a few spare moments (things are _so_ hectic here!).

Cool. I can wait for that.

 

[cbrunish]

But I'm assuming that you can use the Traveller product if it is for publication in the Signs&Portents.

 

[GypsyComet]

But I'm assuming that you can use the Traveller product if it is for publication in the Signs&Portents.

Well yes, but that's a different case, and doesn't fall under the OGL.

 

[aspqrz]

Of course, you could use HG and SRD terms ("torpedoes") and design sequences as long as you don't use the Traveller logo

No you really can't.

Yes. You really can.

Note carefully what I said. I didn't say you could quote anything from High Guard, which, indeed, would be a breach of copyright, I merely said that you could "use the High Guard terms" ... such as "Torpedoes" or "Command Bridge" ... which are plain english ... and not use the Traveller logo.

You couldn't use the explanations from HG, either, though you could certainly rewrite them.

The point is, if you want to design ships using HG, as long as you don't breach copyright by citing the design sequences themselves your *end result* is fine, and commercially publishable.

But you'd need to understand, as I said, that you couldn't use the TLL or say "compatible with Traveller" either.

But you absolutely cannot use the design sequences from HG.

Again, no. You really can. You can use the design sequences to design somethinhg and then publish it as long as, as noted, you don't actually publish the design sequences merely the end product.

Copyright only protects specific wordings, not ideas per se. And clearly if you use the design sequences the end product of same are *not* specific wordings.

Explaining what the terms and stats mean would be problematic, which, you'll note, I specifically said you couldn't do.

Phil

 

[dmccoy1693]

you couldn't ...say "compatible with Traveller"

Copyright law or not, that's forbidden by the OGL. Expressly.

use the TLL or either.

There is nothing stopping anyone from using their own interpretation of a torpedo or command bridge or etc with the TLL.

The real issue is the design sequences. There is, however, issues with creating a 10 ton fighter with an sD power source or a capital ship with a BB power source armed with a railgun barbette that does 3d6 damage. If you did that you'd be in serious hot water.

If you're a lawyer or someone that's worked in publishing for years AND you're doing the publishing then that's one thing, but giving out advice willy nilly to anyone about using stuff that is not open to be used at this point is time is rather irresponsible. You might know all the ins and outs of that field, but not everyone does. The best advice to give someone that does not know all those ins and outs is to play it safe and to stay clear of anything not in the SRD.

 

[dmccoy1693]

May I draw your attenction to the following article. Fast Foward had to destroy material because they used material from Monster Manual II that was not designated as open content. FFE did this because someone on a forum site said it was ok for them to do so. That person was not Wizards of the Coast. Just willy nilly saying that you can use non-OGL material without backing it up by being their editor and taking full responsibility for the product is rather irresponsible.

Last thing I would want is for a new publisher to misinterpret what you're saying as cart blanche permission to use HG as if it were OGL. That is what I am trying to guard against. However, if you feel confident enough to direct some company to use such material, feel free. But I would not recommend any company that is not intricately familiar with such laws to not follow aspqrz's advice without first consulting a lawyer.

 

[Infojunky]

Last thing I would want is for a new publisher to misinterpret what you're saying as cart blanche permission to use HG as if it were OGL. That is what I am trying to guard against. However, if you feel confident enough to direct some company to use such material, feel free. But I would not recommend any company that is not intricately familiar with such laws to not follow aspqrz's advice without first consulting a lawyer.

Are you a IP specialized attorney who has been admitted to the Bar in your state and local federal district?

If not, you probably shouldn't be quite so dogmatic about what one can or can't do in terms of writing, especially not when when the said work fall generally within the Fair-use Clause of the Copyright Act.

If you are please Cite which cases you are quoting and/or basing your arguments off of.

With that being said if one where to publish a ship book based off of the design sequences as present within the TMB and Highguard (one can make reasonable case that HG designs are just and extension of what is started in the TMB thus an implied extension of the SRD) That were just the result of use of said system said book would be in compliance in general with the stated license. As no part of the concealed workings system were exposed by the publication.

I the above case reasonable is met. Now there is the case of who has the deeper pockets. As Mongoose is a foreign company (at least to me and presumably to Phil) they would have the expense of filing in a jurisdiction that had standing as to both parties. Though at least here with both the federal and state courts I would can see a strong case for a motion of summery judgment in the favor of the secondary publisher. As the complied with the stated license to the best of their ability.

--As a General note. I am not a practicing Lawyer I have been studying law over the past 4 years and have enough hours to take the Bar Exam and be admitted within my Jurisdiction (the State of California)--

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

Maybe you guys should just EMail Matt Sprange with the details of what you are trying to do and ask his opinion?

Whether it is "legal" or not, if Mongoose is OK with you publishing it, then you are OK, since they are the only ones that are going to come after you.

Matt has been very reasonable in the past. Just talk to him...

 

[Court Jester]

Maybe you guys should just EMail Matt Sprange with the details of what you are trying to do and ask his opinion?

Whether it is "legal" or not, if Mongoose is OK with you publishing it, then you are OK, since they are the only ones that are going to come after you.

Matt has been very reasonable in the past. Just talk to him...

And stop this fine argument?

NEVER!

 

[aspqrz]

you couldn't ...say "compatible with Traveller"

Copyright law or not, that's forbidden by the OGL. Expressly.

With the greatest of respect, so what?

I never said anything different.

You have effortlessly made statements that don't connect with anything I said and continue to do so with this one.

use the TLL or either.

There is nothing stopping anyone from using their own interpretation of a torpedo or command bridge or etc with the TLL.

Exactly.

I am glad you grasp the essentials of what I said the first time. Finally.

The real issue is the design sequences.

Only if, as you continue to do, completely fail to grasp what I have said from the beginning.

Which is that the products of the design sequences are not, and cannot be, covered by copyright restrictions and/or the OGL.

Only the design sequences themselves can be so covered.

As long as you present a description of the results of those sequences only and don't attempt to define terms defined in the SRD or in HG then your products are fine. Of course, as you are finally coming to realise, if you define terms that are defined in the SRD or HG differently and do not claim compatibility under the TLL, then you can even do that.

Why? Because the OGL allows you to use the SRD in that way and if you then add things that just happen to be similar in effect, but described differently, to things in HG, then that's fine, legally speaking.

There is, however, issues with creating a 10 ton fighter with an sD power source or a capital ship with a BB power source armed with a railgun barbette that does 3d6 damage. If you did that you'd be in serious hot water.

Nope. You cannot copyright terms in general use. Railgun is in general use. So is Barbette. So are the letters "BB" or "sD" for that matter.

What you couldn't do ... and what I have said all along you couldn't do, and what you have failed to grasp all along and are still failing to grasp ... is use the exact worded descriptions of those things from the design sequences.

If you made up your own definitions that just happened to result in designs with "Displacement Ton" hulls and Power Plants rated from A-ZZ or whatever using the elements available in the SRD plus your own material that just happens to be functionally identical to what High Guard design sequences produce, you could. And it would contravene neither copyright nor the SRD nor the OGL or anything.

If that weren't the case then no other role playing system would be legal, as TSR and its successors would have been able to suppress all successors to DnD on the basis you are arguing.

If you're a lawyer or someone that's worked in publishing for years AND you're doing the publishing then that's one thing, but giving out advice willy nilly to anyone about using stuff that is not open to be used at this point is time is rather irresponsible. You might know all the ins and outs of that field, but not everyone does. The best advice to give someone that does not know all those ins and outs is to play it safe and to stay clear of anything not in the SRD.

OK, then, on what basis are you offering advice that is patently wrong?

As for being in the industry, well, since the release of Space Opera, lo, these many years ago. As an independent publisher, oh, probably ten years or more.

The information I have given, and which you have serially failed to grasp, is common knowledge.

You can produce any product you like as long as you a) don't breach copyright and b) if there is some sort of OGL involved, don't breach the rules of the OGL.

Note that the Mongoose Traveller SRD allows the production of materials under the OGL, which means anyone could use the SRD to create a whole compatible game system. And if, by chance, this included ship design sequences that included all the sorts of things that High Guard does, and produces designs that are functionally compatible with it, all without using any of the copyrightable elements of High Guard, then that's fine and not illegal ... in fact, if you adhered closely to the SRD it would be difficult to produce a ship design system that was anything but functionally compatible with High Guard.

This is basic copyright law.

Now, of course, as I have said all along, you couldn't use any of the terms not allowed under the TLL, unless, of course, you eschew that and publish it entirely as OGL. Which, of course, many people have done with OGL systems based on the WotC/Hasbro OGL.

This is hardly rocket science. Of course, perhaps having been in the industry for as long as I have and having listened to people carefully over the years I could be regarded as being more knowledgeable than some fanboy off the street ...

Phil

 

[EDG]

If I may de-lurk and interject for a moment...

I've noticed that dmmcoy1693 has on several occasions been telling people - with the best intentions I'm sure - what they can and can't do with the OGL, both here and elsewhere. But by his own logic presented here, he doesn't really have the authority to do so any more than anyone else who isn't working for Mongoose (I think at one point I even pointed that out to him too).

Basically, it should be left solely to Matt or a Mongoose employee in the know to answer questions on what could or couldn't be used from specific books - that way you know you'll get a definitive and correct answer straight from the source. Other people ideally shouldn't be answering such questions publicly at all IMO, at least not before saying "this is all entirely my own opinion, I am not a lawyer, and I may be wrong" - though I think not answering at all is better because it avoids confusion.

 

[aspqrz]

May I draw your attenction to the following article. Fast Foward had to destroy material because they used material from Monster Manual II that was not designated as open content.

Strawman.

Irrelevant. I have never said use material not designated as open content.

You continue to argue things that I have specifically never said.

What I have said is that the products of the design sequences are not copyrightable and are not disallowed under the OGL.

Which is entirely different to what you are arguing.

Phil

 

[Infojunky]

SORRY....

Just the Dogma was a little thick.

 

[dmccoy1693]

As someone who has seen a company that had to pulp products, I would like to not see that again. While I am sure that everything you are saying aspqrz is correct (and was never arguing that you it wasn't), saying "Of course, you could use HG and SRD terms ("torpedoes") and design sequences" to someone who is not as versed in copyright law as you obviously are is not responsible and very easy to misinterpret (which you will note I have been saying from the beginning).

My goal is to keep a Traveller company from getting product pulped, nothing more, nothing less. Since I appear to be surrounded by several copyright lawyers and my assistance is not welcome, then I will bow out of this thread. Good day.