This has been a question I've been sitting on for awhile because it seems to be a bit different depending on the creator in question.

For example someone had recently been caught plagiarizing from ultraviolet grasslands, mainly they had stolen some monsters and random tables as far as I recall the story.

But it was never clarified to me if the issue they had was because it was similar or because it was a straight up lift of text from the UVG book.

But that drama mainly centered around a circle of far lefty types, so their standards don't really matter to me.

I'm more interested what the core-OSR crowd thinks so I guess I'll ask a couple of examples.

Number 1: Is it okay to copy a mechanic wholesale? as long as it's somewhat reworded and proper inspiration credit is given somewhere in the book?

Number 2: Is it okay to modify an existing random table and put that in your own book, provided you list inspiration?

Number 3: When is it okay to burrow or use a mechanic and not list inspiration?

Number :4 is it less to do with credit, and more to do with claiming you are the originator of an idea or mechanic?

I guess I don't have any other questions, those are just the one's that came to mind, the OSR being built on TSR era D&D to me always has had a weird relationship with plagiarism and I typically don't hear it come up often.

Number 1: a mechanic is not copyrightable. As long as you use your own unique and distinct language to explain/describe the mechanic, you can do whatever you want. "Somewhat rewording" a mechanic probably won't cut it. You don't need to credit the inspiration. In fact, from a legal standpoint it's probably better if you don't. But I stress use your own language.

Number 2: Create your own table. Even if it's similar in function, use your own language (unless it's super generic). But do the work and create something.

Number 3: when you write the mechanic in your own language.

Number 4: this question is redundant, but yes.

A lot of the OSR stuff is released under the OGL. Following the requirements of that license allows you to use most of the language verbatim (that's the point of the license). Read the small print to see what parts of the system are NOT considered open content to cover your ass.

I have no idea if UVG is OGL or not. Do the tedious research.

Quote from: Nakana on June 03, 2024, 05:17:54 PMNumber 1: a mechanic is not copyrightable. As long as you use your own unique and distinct language to explain/describe the mechanic, you can do whatever you want. "Somewhat rewording" a mechanic probably won't cut it. You don't need to credit the inspiration. In fact, from a legal standpoint it's probably better if you don't. But I stress use your own language.

Number 2: Create your own table. Even if it's similar in function, use your own language (unless it's super generic). But do the work and create something.

Number 3: when you write the mechanic in your own language.

Number 4: this question is redundant, but yes.

A lot of the OSR stuff is released under the OGL. Following the requirements of that license allows you to use most of the language verbatim (that's the point of the license). Read the small print to see what parts of the system are NOT considered open content to cover your ass.

I have no idea if UVG is OGL or not. Do the tedious research.

To point 1, I've seen plenty of OSR zines and games at least credit other creators in the Appendixes, is this the same thing and legally ill-advised?

and for point 2, I see a lot of mechanics, mainly pertaining to D&D attributes and skill checks where the wording between different RPGs is only slightly different or a matter of formatting, I imagine it's quite hard to re-explain a mechanic 12 times or more.

ACKS straight up ripped the economic system, including word or word tables from BECMI gazetteers and I remember getting attacked for pointing that out

So basically just a popularity contest.

Mechanics aren't copyrightable, the particular wording might be, if you're using material under the OGL you have to make sure it's covered by the license, change the trade dress and credit in the OGL you include at the end the sources.

Tables: What type of table? How can you reword it? Can it be reworded?

Let's take for example a weapons table, how can you reword longsword? Furthermore you DO NOT need to.

Now IANAL but, is the particular order of columns and lines part of the trade dress?

Quote from: Socratic-DM on June 03, 2024, 04:40:17 PMThis has been a question I've been sitting on for awhile because it seems to be a bit different depending on the creator in question.

For example someone had recently been caught plagiarizing from ultraviolet grasslands, mainly they had stolen some monsters and random tables as far as I recall the story.

But it was never clarified to me if the issue they had was because it was similar or because it was a straight up lift of text from the UVG book.

I guess I don't have any other questions, those are just the one's that came to mind, the OSR being built on TSR era D&D to me always has had a weird relationship with plagiarism and I typically don't hear it come up often.

Start with what the license is. The OGL and CC-4.0-BY encourage the use of material under their licenses. Proper attribution is necessary. The point is to not reinvent the wheel and maintain a certain level of compatibility. Then add in your own creative bits and pieces. By reusing code, I mean material, you save time and energy for working on what really matters to you.

Plagiarism implies cheating, violating a code of conduct, or behavior unbecoming a gentleman; um, I mean game designer.

As regards the original retro clones, they rewrote and restated ideas and concepts. No copyright infringement. Truly there are no new things under the sun. Look at Gygax's and Arneson's influences and borrowings.

Quote from: JeremyR on June 03, 2024, 06:05:34 PMACKS straight up ripped the economic system, including word or word tables from BECMI gazetteers and I remember getting attacked for pointing that out

So basically just a popularity contest.

I think generally there's unlikely to be a real legal issue with borrowing mechanics - but there might an issue of perception in one's audience. With other small-press OSR publishers, I'd say the safest route is to contact the author and ask their permission.

If they don't give their permission, then one can still take the idea, but you might want to rewrite or reformat it a little more to make it look different.

Quote from: JeremyR on June 03, 2024, 06:05:34 PMACKS straight up ripped the economic system, including word or word tables from BECMI gazetteers and I remember getting attacked for pointing that out

So basically just a popularity contest.

Yeah that and Labrinith Lord and a few early "OSR" things that werent even D&D.

Quote from: Socratic-DM on June 03, 2024, 04:40:17 PMNumber 1: Is it okay to copy a mechanic wholesale? as long as it's somewhat reworded and proper inspiration credit is given somewhere in the book?

Nobody owns an idea, only the expression of it. That being said it never hurts to be generous with credit.

Quote from: Socratic-DM on June 03, 2024, 04:40:17 PMNumber 2: Is it okay to modify an existing random table and put that in your own book, provided you list inspiration?

Probably not, as random tables tend to be 100% creative expression thus fully protected under copyright.

Quote from: Socratic-DM on June 03, 2024, 04:40:17 PMNumber 3: When is it okay to burrow or use a mechanic and not list inspiration?

Provided that you write it in your own words. Ideas are not protected unless patented which very rare in the RPG industry. But again I stress it never hurts to be generous with credit along with talking about your plans with the original creator in the first place. In short you don't have to but it pays to be polite.

Quote from: Socratic-DM on June 03, 2024, 04:40:17 PMNumber :4 is it less to do with credit, and more to do with claiming you are the originator of an idea or mechanic?

If you didn't originate the idea, then claiming that you did is lying.

Quote from: Socratic-DM on June 03, 2024, 04:40:17 PMI guess I don't have any other questions, those are just the one's that came to mind, the OSR being built on TSR era D&D to me always has had a weird relationship with plagiarism and I typically don't hear it come up often.

Because the original hack relied on repurposing open content released under open licenses. The terms of the open license cover the contingencies and the issue of plagiarism. For example updating section 15 when using the OGL. Or print the required credit when using Creative Common-Attribution (CC-BY).

This combined with the fact that we are all referring to the same set of out of print books means that sharing material more common in the OSR than in other industry niches.

The problem is when folks say fuck open content and fuck open licenses. They are welcome to the mess they created for themselves. In contrast, participating in the spirit (and letter) of open content, open licenses, and freely sharing what one creates, then, you avoid this kind of bullshit. In addition, by sharing, you are making our niche of the hobby and industry better and easier to get into for anybody else who follows.

Swords & Wizardry, Labyrinth Lord, OSRIC, and Old School Essentials have either all or most of their text under open content, which is free for you to rewrite or use 'as is' in your own work. Or you can follow their example and use the material in the d20-SRD under the OGL or the 5e SRD under CC-BY to realize your own vision in your own way.

Rob's Note: What you are looking for out of both SRD is basically the body of terms and concepts not the newer mechanics. Although for somethings like monsters, magic items, and spells there are still useful bits that can be copied 'as is' when the new mechanics are excised.

Rob's Note: At the level of publishing that most of the OSR and I operate at, credit is a big deal. Most people like supporting specific authors if they like their work. I found piracy is largely a non-issue, even though my entire body of work is out there if you know where to look. I only take action if I see a pirate link appear in the first few pages of Google search and then that between Google and myself. I don't bother with the pirated site itself. 

Most of the time, those serious about using my material and publishing follow the terms of the various licenses I use (OGL and CC-BY). And the key requirement for both is crediting myself and the work they are drawing from.

And as a rule, I don't like using share-alike licenses. I used the OGL (which is a weak share-alike) because that was the standard but I am much happier now that CC-BY is a thing in the industry now.

So far I released under CC-BY

Blackmarsh setting
The Basic Rules for the Majestic Fantasy RPG
The Travel rules out of How to Make a Fantasy Sandbox
The Isle of Pyade setting

Along with rough draft of materials here
https://batintheattic.blogspot.com/p/stuff-in-attic.html

Some of it original and some of it is adapted from other OSR system. Either under the terms of their license or by me asking them politely if I could use specific elements under CC-BY.

Quote from: estar on June 04, 2024, 11:13:35 AM

Quote from: Socratic-DM on June 03, 2024, 04:40:17 PMNumber 1: Is it okay to copy a mechanic wholesale? as long as it's somewhat reworded and proper inspiration credit is given somewhere in the book?

Nobody owns an idea, only the expression of it. That being said it never hurts to be generous with credit.

Quote from: Socratic-DM on June 03, 2024, 04:40:17 PMNumber 2: Is it okay to modify an existing random table and put that in your own book, provided you list inspiration?

Probably not, as random tables tend to be 100% creative expression thus fully protected under copyright.

Quote from: Socratic-DM on June 03, 2024, 04:40:17 PMNumber 3: When is it okay to burrow or use a mechanic and not list inspiration?

Provided that you write it in your own words. Ideas are not protected unless patented which very rare in the RPG industry. But again I stress it never hurts to be generous with credit along with talking about your plans with the original creator in the first place. In short you don't have to but it pays to be polite.

Quote from: Socratic-DM on June 03, 2024, 04:40:17 PMNumber :4 is it less to do with credit, and more to do with claiming you are the originator of an idea or mechanic?

If you didn't originate the idea, then claiming that you did is lying.

Quote from: Socratic-DM on June 03, 2024, 04:40:17 PMI guess I don't have any other questions, those are just the one's that came to mind, the OSR being built on TSR era D&D to me always has had a weird relationship with plagiarism and I typically don't hear it come up often.

Because the original hack relied on repurposing open content released under open licenses. The terms of the open license cover the contingencies and the issue of plagiarism. For example updating section 15 when using the OGL. Or print the required credit when using Creative Common-Attribution (CC-BY).

This combined with the fact that we are all referring to the same set of out of print books means that sharing material more common in the OSR than in other industry niches.

The problem is when folks say fuck open content and fuck open licenses. They are welcome to the mess they created for themselves. In contrast, participating in the spirit (and letter) of open content, open licenses, and freely sharing what one creates, then, you avoid this kind of bullshit. In addition, by sharing, you are making our niche of the hobby and industry better and easier to get into for anybody else who follows.

Swords & Wizardry, Labyrinth Lord, OSRIC, and Old School Essentials have either all or most of their text under open content, which is free for you to rewrite or use 'as is' in your own work. Or you can follow their example and use the material in the d20-SRD under the OGL or the 5e SRD under CC-BY to realize your own vision in your own way.

Rob's Note: What you are looking for out of both SRD is basically the body of terms and concepts not the newer mechanics. Although for somethings like monsters, magic items, and spells there are still useful bits that can be copied 'as is' when the new mechanics are excised.

Rob's Note: At the level of publishing that most of the OSR and I operate at, credit is a big deal. Most people like supporting specific authors if they like their work. I found piracy is largely a non-issue, even though my entire body of work is out there if you know where to look. I only take action if I see a pirate link appear in the first few pages of Google search and then that between Google and myself. I don't bother with the pirated site itself. 

Most of the time, those serious about using my material and publishing follow the terms of the various licenses I use (OGL and CC-BY). And the key requirement for both is crediting myself and the work they are drawing from.

And as a rule, I don't like using share-alike licenses. I used the OGL (which is a weak share-alike) because that was the standard but I am much happier now that CC-BY is a thing in the industry now.

So far I released under CC-BY

Blackmarsh setting
The Basic Rules for the Majestic Fantasy RPG
The Travel rules out of How to Make a Fantasy Sandbox
The Isle of Pyade setting

Along with rough draft of materials here
https://batintheattic.blogspot.com/p/stuff-in-attic.html

Some of it original and some of it is adapted from other OSR system. Either under the terms of their license or by me asking them politely if I could use specific elements under CC-BY.

Just based off everything said, it sounds like it isn't not a liability to base a game off another, so long as one is not directly lifting text from said source, and so far as attribution is given.

And of the two what do you consider the way to go, OGL or CC-BY? for me CC-BY I like a lot  mainly cause 1. I like the open concept people can make supplements for my work, and as well I like the spirit of creative commons more than an "Open Gaming Licence" but I could be mislead.

Quote from: Socratic-DM on June 05, 2024, 05:23:51 PMAnd of the two what do you consider the way to go, OGL or CC-BY? for me CC-BY I like a lot  mainly cause 1. I like the open concept people can make supplements for my work, and as well I like the spirit of creative commons more than an "Open Gaming Licence" but I could be mislead.

After the OGL brew-ha-ha not long ago I think I'd avoid OGL going forward to avoid future WotC greedy shenanigans.

Quote from: Socratic-DM on June 05, 2024, 05:23:51 PMAnd of the two what do you consider the way to go, OGL or CC-BY? for me CC-BY I like a lot  mainly cause 1. I like the open concept people can make supplements for my work, and as well I like the spirit of creative commons more than an "Open Gaming Licence" but I could be mislead.

I recommend CC-BY whenever possible. It has a lot more legal resources and vetting behind it than the OGL. For you the terms are easy to fulfill just include the credit. And for the things you want to open up, it is easy to setup with one wrinkle.

The wrinkle being that unlike the OGL or ORC the license doesn't have a standard to designate which portion of your work is open content and which is not. So I recommend if you going to share material under CC-BY copy the text and make it a separate document and license that text (not the published work) under CC-BY.

For example my book How to Make a Fantasy Sandbox has an appendix for Travel rules and encounters. I took that appendix, made a nicely formatted text document for it and released that under CC-BY. As well as including it in the list of files you get when you buy the book on DriveThruRPG. I did this for my Fantasy Demographics rules as well.

That way it is clear to the downstream user of your content what exactly you are sharing. I saw people try to mark up part of their published work as CC-BY shared content, and I think my approach is the better way to go as far as clarity. And it doesn't add much to what you have to do to publish.

Quote from: estar on June 06, 2024, 11:13:17 AM

Quote from: Socratic-DM on June 05, 2024, 05:23:51 PMAnd of the two what do you consider the way to go, OGL or CC-BY? for me CC-BY I like a lot  mainly cause 1. I like the open concept people can make supplements for my work, and as well I like the spirit of creative commons more than an "Open Gaming Licence" but I could be mislead.

I recommend CC-BY whenever possible. It has a lot more legal resources and vetting behind it than the OGL. For you the terms are easy to fulfill just include the credit. And for the things you want to open up, it is easy to setup with one wrinkle.

The wrinkle being that unlike the OGL or ORC the license doesn't have a standard to designate which portion of your work is open content and which is not. So I recommend if you going to share material under CC-BY copy the text and make it a separate document and license that text (not the published work) under CC-BY.

For example my book How to Make a Fantasy Sandbox has an appendix for Travel rules and encounters. I took that appendix, made a nicely formatted text document for it and released that under CC-BY. As well as including it in the list of files you get when you buy the book on DriveThruRPG. I did this for my Fantasy Demographics rules as well.

That way it is clear to the downstream user of your content what exactly you are sharing. I saw people try to mark up part of their published work as CC-BY shared content, and I think my approach is the better way to go as far as clarity. And it doesn't add much to what you have to do to publish.

Not the OP, but...

OK, that's brilliant.  Of course, now I need to look at my formatting and organization, since it makes sense to me to organize in a way that let's me pull out the CC-BY most easily.  But that's great advice, thanks!

Quote from: estar on June 06, 2024, 11:13:17 AM

Quote from: Socratic-DM on June 05, 2024, 05:23:51 PMAnd of the two what do you consider the way to go, OGL or CC-BY? for me CC-BY I like a lot  mainly cause 1. I like the open concept people can make supplements for my work, and as well I like the spirit of creative commons more than an "Open Gaming Licence" but I could be mislead.

I recommend CC-BY whenever possible. It has a lot more legal resources and vetting behind it than the OGL. For you the terms are easy to fulfill just include the credit. And for the things you want to open up, it is easy to setup with one wrinkle.

The wrinkle being that unlike the OGL or ORC the license doesn't have a standard to designate which portion of your work is open content and which is not. So I recommend if you going to share material under CC-BY copy the text and make it a separate document and license that text (not the published work) under CC-BY.

For example my book How to Make a Fantasy Sandbox has an appendix for Travel rules and encounters. I took that appendix, made a nicely formatted text document for it and released that under CC-BY. As well as including it in the list of files you get when you buy the book on DriveThruRPG. I did this for my Fantasy Demographics rules as well.

That way it is clear to the downstream user of your content what exactly you are sharing. I saw people try to mark up part of their published work as CC-BY shared content, and I think my approach is the better way to go as far as clarity. And it doesn't add much to what you have to do to publish.

Yeah that sounds like sound advice, so I get the publishing rights to the Book and physical publishing, but the text is open and therefore anyone can make variants or supplements for those rules, keeps the open spirit of things but protects my altruism from being abused.