dmccoy1693
Cosmic Mongoose
Rikki Tikki Traveller said:
Or simply never mention where it takes place in.
Traveller Developer's Pack
- Thread starter MongooseMatt
- Start date
Or simply never mention where it takes place in.
Rikki Tikki Traveller
Cosmic Mongoose
I don't think you can do that if you are going to sell the product.
The OTU is off limits EXCEPT in the Foreven Sector. If you don't put LSP in the context of Foreven, you are violating the copyright of the OTU.
I'm not a Lawyer, but that is how I see it.
The OTU is off limits EXCEPT in the Foreven Sector. If you don't put LSP in the context of Foreven, you are violating the copyright of the OTU.
I'm not a Lawyer, but that is how I see it.
dmccoy1693
Cosmic Mongoose
Rikki Tikki Traveller said:
FFSLL v1 said:
Emphasis mine.
If you never discuss the location, you're fine.
EDIT: If you want to discuss Hivers and place a hiver colony on some world. You can do that. Now as long as the name of that colony world isn't on the OTU map (anywhere), you're fine. You never need to mention which sector it is in. Its simply assumed to be in sector Foreven.
But if you want to discuss some specific hiver thing that was mentioned in some previously published material that is somewhere outside of Foreven, you better discuss how it applies to Foreven. Because that is not assumed to be in the Foreven sector.
Rikki Tikki Traveller
Cosmic Mongoose
True, I guess we were talking about different things.
I was refering to references to OTU companies, such as Ling Standard Products (LSP). If you are going to reference LSP in your published (for money) work, you have to somehow refer to it in relation to the Foreven Sector.
You are correct regarding location.
Sorry for any confusion.
I was refering to references to OTU companies, such as Ling Standard Products (LSP). If you are going to reference LSP in your published (for money) work, you have to somehow refer to it in relation to the Foreven Sector.
You are correct regarding location.
Sorry for any confusion.
I'd just like to throw a big huge spiky hand-grenade into this discussion, just for the fun of it.
I expect that compilation copyright is also likely to apply to many products based on OGL material. Actually I think this is a very good thing.
Protecting open content is very important. Just because you publish a character with Medic-4 skill you can't prevent others from doing so. Further I believe that stats for character created using the Traveller rules are open content, and it's very important that others using those rules aren't prevented from coming up with the same results either by design or chance. We can't end up in a situation where certain results from the chargen rules become 'owned' by someone. The same applies for world stats, starship designs, etc.
Clearly the fact that the text descriptions of those characters and worlds, etc and even their names can be protected copyrighted material is a good thing.
However, if you publish a Traveller supplement, even though the stats for individual characters, creatures, worlds and starships are likely to be open content, the compilation of them into a product is almost certainly protected by compliation copyright. What this means is that if you publish a collection of stats for 100 NPCs along with names and background descriptions, I don't think I can come along and just publish all the bare stats from your supplement. If some characters in my supplement happen to have the same stats then I'm fine, but I can't just rip you off wholesale.
Now I'm not a lawyer, but for example if your supplement contains a criminal gang called 'The Punkboy Crazys', I believe compilation copyright would prevent me from stealing the stats for those characters, calling my versions 'The Crazy Asswipes' and attaching some turgid prose of my own devising. That would probably be sailing too close to the wind.
All of which I believe is a good thing, because it's the creativity in the bringing together of material into a composition or narrative that adds value to the underlying source material. I think that the open content rules can protect that underlying open content material, which is vital, yet compilation copyright along with normal copyright on descriptive text should offer appropriately strong protection for the original work in a publication containing them.
Now exactly how far compilation copyright is likely to go is a mystery to me. The results from rolling up a character are unlikely to IMHO because you're just cranking the gears on an automated system, but a complex starship design might in theory qualify. Now at this point the licensing of the Traveller material also comes into play, if the license says such material must be open content too (and I think they do) then that will probably trump compilation copyright. However the compilation of designs into a battle group or fleet of ships may well be a different question. The exact location of the dividing line is a question for real lawyers and the courts, but it seems to me that the laws in this regard on both sides of the Atlantic are reasonably sane and just.
Best regards,
Simon Hibbs
I expect that compilation copyright is also likely to apply to many products based on OGL material. Actually I think this is a very good thing.
Protecting open content is very important. Just because you publish a character with Medic-4 skill you can't prevent others from doing so. Further I believe that stats for character created using the Traveller rules are open content, and it's very important that others using those rules aren't prevented from coming up with the same results either by design or chance. We can't end up in a situation where certain results from the chargen rules become 'owned' by someone. The same applies for world stats, starship designs, etc.
Clearly the fact that the text descriptions of those characters and worlds, etc and even their names can be protected copyrighted material is a good thing.
However, if you publish a Traveller supplement, even though the stats for individual characters, creatures, worlds and starships are likely to be open content, the compilation of them into a product is almost certainly protected by compliation copyright. What this means is that if you publish a collection of stats for 100 NPCs along with names and background descriptions, I don't think I can come along and just publish all the bare stats from your supplement. If some characters in my supplement happen to have the same stats then I'm fine, but I can't just rip you off wholesale.
Now I'm not a lawyer, but for example if your supplement contains a criminal gang called 'The Punkboy Crazys', I believe compilation copyright would prevent me from stealing the stats for those characters, calling my versions 'The Crazy Asswipes' and attaching some turgid prose of my own devising. That would probably be sailing too close to the wind.
All of which I believe is a good thing, because it's the creativity in the bringing together of material into a composition or narrative that adds value to the underlying source material. I think that the open content rules can protect that underlying open content material, which is vital, yet compilation copyright along with normal copyright on descriptive text should offer appropriately strong protection for the original work in a publication containing them.
Now exactly how far compilation copyright is likely to go is a mystery to me. The results from rolling up a character are unlikely to IMHO because you're just cranking the gears on an automated system, but a complex starship design might in theory qualify. Now at this point the licensing of the Traveller material also comes into play, if the license says such material must be open content too (and I think they do) then that will probably trump compilation copyright. However the compilation of designs into a battle group or fleet of ships may well be a different question. The exact location of the dividing line is a question for real lawyers and the courts, but it seems to me that the laws in this regard on both sides of the Atlantic are reasonably sane and just.
Best regards,
Simon Hibbs
Rikki Tikki Traveller
Cosmic Mongoose
Simon that sounds reasonable.
If I create and publish and NPC, then the STATS are OGC, including the Events/Mishaps and Life Events.
BUT, the name and the written description etc are closed, since they are what I created for the NPC.
So Dirk Stardinger is MINE, but his UPP of 957599 is OGC.
But, your point is also valid, if I publish Dirk Stardinger and you come along and publish Sirk Dardinger with a UPP of 957599, then we may have a problem.
Roll your own character and happen to come up with the same UPP values, no problem though.
If I create and publish and NPC, then the STATS are OGC, including the Events/Mishaps and Life Events.
BUT, the name and the written description etc are closed, since they are what I created for the NPC.
So Dirk Stardinger is MINE, but his UPP of 957599 is OGC.
But, your point is also valid, if I publish Dirk Stardinger and you come along and publish Sirk Dardinger with a UPP of 957599, then we may have a problem.
Roll your own character and happen to come up with the same UPP values, no problem though.
GypsyComet
Emperor Mongoose
simonh said:
Though not as many as some people think.
Ok, I have some questions regarding the Traveller Logo License and High Guard. This question does assume that HG's ship design stuff will eventually fall under the SRD (hopefully soon).
For my ATU setting, I have to make a couple of changes to the ship design sequence for the FTL drive, and a couple of other minor things, like min-max hull sizes, a couple pieces of softare, etc. Other than these changes, everything else can be used as is from the MTB and/or High Guard, which won't be duplicated in my book. I'm intending that all of my changes/additions will be OGC - mostly because I want them to be*.
1. Can I write my changes/additions to the ship design stuff referencing only the HG method of calculating M-drive and Power plant volumes, rather than the letter classifications of the main book? Or will I have to refer to both?
2. Part of the license says that by using the TLL, I know I have to state "Requires the use of Traveller by Mongoose Publishing" or words to that effect. This is fine, and expected, but what if I want to go beyond that for requirements? Is it out of line to say a product requires the use of another, non-ogl product like High Guard as well as the main book? In other words, is it ok to also say "Requires the use of Traveller: High Guard by Mongoose Publishing" in addition to other requirements?
And yes, I do realize that I won't be able to release this ATU until/if HG is added to the SRD, and my stuff is covered under it. If that doesn't happen, I may have to go back to that area and tweak things. However, I am assuming Matt will work quicker at getting HG into the SRD than I will on my project.
*it is entirely possible that some of my changes will be required to be open content by what they are based on, but I'm not bothering to figure out what has to be vs what doesn't, since I want to return something to the community. Now, as long as I don't end up in a quandry where I want to use closed content that I can't use...like if HG is never released to the SRD...
For my ATU setting, I have to make a couple of changes to the ship design sequence for the FTL drive, and a couple of other minor things, like min-max hull sizes, a couple pieces of softare, etc. Other than these changes, everything else can be used as is from the MTB and/or High Guard, which won't be duplicated in my book. I'm intending that all of my changes/additions will be OGC - mostly because I want them to be*.
1. Can I write my changes/additions to the ship design stuff referencing only the HG method of calculating M-drive and Power plant volumes, rather than the letter classifications of the main book? Or will I have to refer to both?
2. Part of the license says that by using the TLL, I know I have to state "Requires the use of Traveller by Mongoose Publishing" or words to that effect. This is fine, and expected, but what if I want to go beyond that for requirements? Is it out of line to say a product requires the use of another, non-ogl product like High Guard as well as the main book? In other words, is it ok to also say "Requires the use of Traveller: High Guard by Mongoose Publishing" in addition to other requirements?
And yes, I do realize that I won't be able to release this ATU until/if HG is added to the SRD, and my stuff is covered under it. If that doesn't happen, I may have to go back to that area and tweak things. However, I am assuming Matt will work quicker at getting HG into the SRD than I will on my project.
*it is entirely possible that some of my changes will be required to be open content by what they are based on, but I'm not bothering to figure out what has to be vs what doesn't, since I want to return something to the community. Now, as long as I don't end up in a quandry where I want to use closed content that I can't use...like if HG is never released to the SRD...
Rikki Tikki Traveller
Cosmic Mongoose
Good question...
Matt has already stated that the PRODUCT of the design sequence is OGC, so if you build a ship and include features or numbers that are from HG, that can still be OGC, but if you want to direct a Referee to use a design sequence in HG, I don't know how that would work.
This will probably come up again with Scouts and Psion if they include design sequences. Their World Builders Handbook will definitely fall into that problem area.
Matt has already stated that the PRODUCT of the design sequence is OGC, so if you build a ship and include features or numbers that are from HG, that can still be OGC, but if you want to direct a Referee to use a design sequence in HG, I don't know how that would work.
This will probably come up again with Scouts and Psion if they include design sequences. Their World Builders Handbook will definitely fall into that problem area.
The product of the sequence being OGC works well for the ships I'll include. But the nature of FTL in my ATU is different enough that just adapting a standard design with the "new" FTL drive instead of a J-drive leaves a really less than optimal design. Which means I'm guessing that most GMs will want to design their own ships from scratch. Plus, I want GMs to be able to design ships for my ATU and publish them as OGC.Rikki Tikki Traveller said:
dmccoy1693
Cosmic Mongoose
kristof65 said:
We'll have to wait and see what the High Guard SRD looks like.
Stick to the legal verbage exactly as written in the license. If Mongoose wants to change the license to include something about Merc and HG, they can. They do not have to though. But no matter what, just stick to exactly what is written in the license.
Not necessarily. I'm asking if I have to refer to the original design sequences, since the TLL requires the statement that the Core Rulebook is required. I suspect it doesn't, since I could theoretically write my own design system from scratch and include it, so I'm just making sure.dmccoy1693 said:
I'm aware of that, and the required legal statements wouldn't be changed, and would be in their required locations, as per the license(s). What I'm asking is if it's ok to do something like at the begining my starship section, make a statement like "To get the most use out of this chapter, you will require Traveller Book 2: High Guard, by Mongoose Publishing."
Since HG as a book is not OGC (although some things within it may become OGC), this is somewhat unclear. I realize that I can't use terms or reference things in HG that aren't also OGC, but that doesn't necessarily limit me from encouraging people to buy it.
On one hand, I don't see a company having a problem with another publisher telling someone "Oh yeah, you need to buy this product to use mine", but with the OGL, one must be careful that you don't violate the license.
A similar situation with the d20 license would be someone writing up a book of templates for creatures. While the book could be useful with just the SRD critters, to really get the most use out of the book, the Monster Manual is a far more useful book than the required players handbook.
Rikki Tikki Traveller
Cosmic Mongoose
The same issue will come up in Beltstrike.
I am writing an adventure set in an asteroid belt. I need to refer Referees to Beltstrike to the tables for Asteroid Mining.
I THINK under the TLL that I can do that. I can't reproduce any of that data (since right now everything in Beltstrike is Closed), but I don't see why I can't refer to that book (by page number if necessary).
I am writing an adventure set in an asteroid belt. I need to refer Referees to Beltstrike to the tables for Asteroid Mining.
I THINK under the TLL that I can do that. I can't reproduce any of that data (since right now everything in Beltstrike is Closed), but I don't see why I can't refer to that book (by page number if necessary).
. You don't have to use the Mongoose version of the rules (besides, who's to say that everyone has Beltstrike? I'm not even sure if anything in Beltstrike will be declared OGC either)True. But why re-write rules if ones that exist work perfectly well?
In the end, it seems to me that third party OGC should ultimately encourage the purchase of the original publisher's material - it's a win-win situation all around - the system has more material available, the publisher sells lots of books encouraging them to keep publishing it, and for the consumer, lots of choice, and fewer conflicting rules for the same thing.
In the end, it seems to me that third party OGC should ultimately encourage the purchase of the original publisher's material - it's a win-win situation all around - the system has more material available, the publisher sells lots of books encouraging them to keep publishing it, and for the consumer, lots of choice, and fewer conflicting rules for the same thing.
kristof65 said:
I have no idea how well the original rules work. But if they're not OGC and one needs to say how to mine asteroids, then obviously it will be necessary to present new rules in the new product.
I think the way that third party products encourage the sale of the original books is where they say "see Traveller Core Rulebook". Or when people say "gee, Company X makes lots of good stuff with this "Traveller" logo on, I think I'll get the Corebook and see what that's all about so I can use them".
TBH though, if you're buying (for example) Spica Career Book 1 then it's very likely that already have the MGT Traveller corebook, or it won't be much use to you otherwise. Obviously something like a starship deckplans are going to be more generically useful without requiring the MGT book, but even then the stats are meaningless without it. That said, if you know about the SRD then you won't even need to buy any MGT books at all because most of the rules required to understand third party products are in there anyway.
