Quote from: King Tyranno on March 21, 2024, 12:45:17 PM
Honestly, I don't think it's possible to get a straight answer until WotC take an OSR dev to court and win or lose. We can say all we want that rules are uncopyrightable and I would agree with that. But will a judge with no prior expertise in RPGs see that the same way when presented with DnD 5E that those kids play, and some game called Lamentations of the Flame Princess with very similar rules and tables? Just slightly different may not be enough.

Of course I don't think WotC see this as a priority so you're potentially safe to have say a Beholder so long as you call it something else and possibly make it look slightly different.

Why not get ahead of the lawsuit by making something different?

Ideally I would love to not have to credit WotC at all but if need be I can work with their CC By SRD.

Which means the stat block has to be a little different, but as long as I don't need to include EVERYTHING they do and I can find a way to include what they don't without risking a lawsuit (reasonably, we know they can do it anyway and bury you under the costs to fight them).

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 21, 2024, 04:48:16 PM

Why not get ahead of the lawsuit by making something different?

If you want anyone to play or even read your RPG, it pretty much has to be D&D, or closely D&D related. Indie RPG's are great, for all 5 people that actually by them (and will probably never play it).

Ok, that is a bit of hyperbole, but it is the difference between thousands of gamers being interested in your RPG or hundreds. So, sadly we have to play with WotC's ball until they take it home.

Quote from: Zalman on March 21, 2024, 12:44:06 PM

Quote from: rytrasmi on March 21, 2024, 11:44:00 AM

Quote from: S'mon on March 19, 2024, 05:55:08 PM

Quote from: Chris24601 on March 19, 2024, 04:01:55 PM
The base stat block (vs. the fluff text beneath it) is pretty much uncopyrightable. Closest you could probably get is a trademark infringement for using the same layout, fonts, and so forth that constitutes a "trade dress."

I teach IP Law for a living, this kinda made me wince 

Really? Care to elaborate?

I've heard that the copyright to a particular arrangement of facts (numbers) is pretty weak because there's little originality in selecting abbreviations/headings and listing numbers next to them. There's only so many ways to list HD, AC, #Att, etc.

I mean, there's still probably some copyright to a bare stat block, but it would be narrow and easily avoided by rearranging or selecting slightly different abbreviations.

Or am I smoking crack?

I suspect S'mon is cringing at the thought of trademarking the stat block format (or trying to) -- not at the notion that it's uncopyrightable.

It was the mix of different IP rights all mixed up together.

Quote from: S'mon on March 22, 2024, 07:15:31 PM

Quote from: Zalman on March 21, 2024, 12:44:06 PM

Quote from: rytrasmi on March 21, 2024, 11:44:00 AM

Quote from: S'mon on March 19, 2024, 05:55:08 PM

Quote from: Chris24601 on March 19, 2024, 04:01:55 PM
The base stat block (vs. the fluff text beneath it) is pretty much uncopyrightable. Closest you could probably get is a trademark infringement for using the same layout, fonts, and so forth that constitutes a "trade dress."

I teach IP Law for a living, this kinda made me wince 

Really? Care to elaborate?

I've heard that the copyright to a particular arrangement of facts (numbers) is pretty weak because there's little originality in selecting abbreviations/headings and listing numbers next to them. There's only so many ways to list HD, AC, #Att, etc.

I mean, there's still probably some copyright to a bare stat block, but it would be narrow and easily avoided by rearranging or selecting slightly different abbreviations.

Or am I smoking crack?

I suspect S'mon is cringing at the thought of trademarking the stat block format (or trying to) -- not at the notion that it's uncopyrightable.

It was the mix of different IP rights all mixed up together.

To be fair; the OP was asking about which of many IP rights apply as a single question so I answered, at least as relates to US law, that copyright is likely not possible for the statblocks, but trademark in the form of trade dress is something to be concerned about and, in my experience, what tends to make companies the most twitchy.

Back in the early-90's there was a minor spat between then established Palladium and new kid on the block White Wolf over the covers of Palladium's Vampire Kingdoms for Rifts and the just released Vampire the Masquerade 1e... centered largely over both covers being perfect bound (VtM didn't go hardcover until 2e), mostly green, and both having the word Vampire on the cover.

The prospect of confusion from FLGS ordering the wrong books just because of those feathers led to ruffled feathers. I dunno if it reached the stage of lawyers, but if you're a small indie publisher, that is exactly the sort of nonsense you want to avoid. Making sure your trade dress is distinct from potential competitors is a very good way to avoid that.

Something as simple as one of two softcover vampire-based books coming out at nearly the same time being mostly red for the cover would have avoided it entirely and I would be lacking a fun anecdote.

In the case of the stat-blocks cited, just using a different font, changing the order the items are presented and using different abbreviations for the traits is probably sufficient to be free and clear. The raw numbers aren't copyrightable and you've presented them in a different configuration, so the "paragraph" isn't duplicated and the trade dress is different.

Maybe things are different in the Commonwealth nations, but I was never discussing their laws in the first place. It was sorting out which terms would be relevant (particularly since GeekyBugle would be dealing with Mexican IP law, which is neither US nor Commonwealth and so further research would be needed from him either way).

Quote from: Chris24601 on March 23, 2024, 08:42:43 AM

Quote from: S'mon on March 22, 2024, 07:15:31 PM

Quote from: Zalman on March 21, 2024, 12:44:06 PM

Quote from: rytrasmi on March 21, 2024, 11:44:00 AM

Quote from: S'mon on March 19, 2024, 05:55:08 PM

Quote from: Chris24601 on March 19, 2024, 04:01:55 PM
The base stat block (vs. the fluff text beneath it) is pretty much uncopyrightable. Closest you could probably get is a trademark infringement for using the same layout, fonts, and so forth that constitutes a "trade dress."

I teach IP Law for a living, this kinda made me wince 

Really? Care to elaborate?

I've heard that the copyright to a particular arrangement of facts (numbers) is pretty weak because there's little originality in selecting abbreviations/headings and listing numbers next to them. There's only so many ways to list HD, AC, #Att, etc.

I mean, there's still probably some copyright to a bare stat block, but it would be narrow and easily avoided by rearranging or selecting slightly different abbreviations.

Or am I smoking crack?

I suspect S'mon is cringing at the thought of trademarking the stat block format (or trying to) -- not at the notion that it's uncopyrightable.

It was the mix of different IP rights all mixed up together.

To be fair; the OP was asking about which of many IP rights apply as a single question so I answered, at least as relates to US law, that copyright is likely not possible for the statblocks, but trademark in the form of trade dress is something to be concerned about and, in my experience, what tends to make companies the most twitchy.

Back in the early-90's there was a minor spat between then established Palladium and new kid on the block White Wolf over the covers of Palladium's Vampire Kingdoms for Rifts and the just released Vampire the Masquerade 1e... centered largely over both covers being perfect bound (VtM didn't go hardcover until 2e), mostly green, and both having the word Vampire on the cover.

The prospect of confusion from FLGS ordering the wrong books just because of those feathers led to ruffled feathers. I dunno if it reached the stage of lawyers, but if you're a small indie publisher, that is exactly the sort of nonsense you want to avoid. Making sure your trade dress is distinct from potential competitors is a very good way to avoid that.

Something as simple as one of two softcover vampire-based books coming out at nearly the same time being mostly red for the cover would have avoided it entirely and I would be lacking a fun anecdote.

In the case of the stat-blocks cited, just using a different font, changing the order the items are presented and using different abbreviations for the traits is probably sufficient to be free and clear. The raw numbers aren't copyrightable and you've presented them in a different configuration, so the "paragraph" isn't duplicated and the trade dress is different.

Maybe things are different in the Commonwealth nations, but I was never discussing their laws in the first place. It was sorting out which terms would be relevant (particularly since GeekyBugle would be dealing with Mexican IP law, which is neither US nor Commonwealth and so further research would be needed from him either way).

ONE: I would LOVE to hear if this is true AFAWK

TWO: I thought that, since WotC is in Commiefornia, I would be dealing with USA law, I mean Sargon's IP trial was held in the USA because the plaintiff was there. Am I missing something?

Quote from: Chris24601 on March 23, 2024, 08:42:43 AM

Quote from: S'mon on March 22, 2024, 07:15:31 PM

Quote from: Zalman on March 21, 2024, 12:44:06 PM

Quote from: rytrasmi on March 21, 2024, 11:44:00 AM

Quote from: S'mon on March 19, 2024, 05:55:08 PM

Quote from: Chris24601 on March 19, 2024, 04:01:55 PM
The base stat block (vs. the fluff text beneath it) is pretty much uncopyrightable. Closest you could probably get is a trademark infringement for using the same layout, fonts, and so forth that constitutes a "trade dress."

I teach IP Law for a living, this kinda made me wince 

Really? Care to elaborate?

I've heard that the copyright to a particular arrangement of facts (numbers) is pretty weak because there's little originality in selecting abbreviations/headings and listing numbers next to them. There's only so many ways to list HD, AC, #Att, etc.

I mean, there's still probably some copyright to a bare stat block, but it would be narrow and easily avoided by rearranging or selecting slightly different abbreviations.

Or am I smoking crack?

I suspect S'mon is cringing at the thought of trademarking the stat block format (or trying to) -- not at the notion that it's uncopyrightable.

It was the mix of different IP rights all mixed up together.

To be fair; the OP was asking about which of many IP rights apply as a single question so I answered, at least as relates to US law, that copyright is likely not possible for the statblocks, but trademark in the form of trade dress is something to be concerned about and, in my experience, what tends to make companies the most twitchy.

Back in the early-90's there was a minor spat between then established Palladium and new kid on the block White Wolf over the covers of Palladium's Vampire Kingdoms for Rifts and the just released Vampire the Masquerade 1e... centered largely over both covers being perfect bound (VtM didn't go hardcover until 2e), mostly green, and both having the word Vampire on the cover.

The prospect of confusion from FLGS ordering the wrong books just because of those feathers led to ruffled feathers. I dunno if it reached the stage of lawyers, but if you're a small indie publisher, that is exactly the sort of nonsense you want to avoid. Making sure your trade dress is distinct from potential competitors is a very good way to avoid that.

Something as simple as one of two softcover vampire-based books coming out at nearly the same time being mostly red for the cover would have avoided it entirely and I would be lacking a fun anecdote.

In the case of the stat-blocks cited, just using a different font, changing the order the items are presented and using different abbreviations for the traits is probably sufficient to be free and clear. The raw numbers aren't copyrightable and you've presented them in a different configuration, so the "paragraph" isn't duplicated and the trade dress is different.

Maybe things are different in the Commonwealth nations, but I was never discussing their laws in the first place. It was sorting out which terms would be relevant (particularly since GeekyBugle would be dealing with Mexican IP law, which is neither US nor Commonwealth and so further research would be needed from him either way).

Sounds reasonable! I was probably being unfair.  For the Commonwealth nations the main difference is we have Passing Off for trade dress, not US State-level Law of Unregistered Marks. And civil law countries like Mexico mostly cover it under Unfair Competition.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 23, 2024, 12:59:52 PM
TWO: I thought that, since WotC is in Commiefornia, I would be dealing with USA law, I mean Sargon's IP trial was held in the USA because the plaintiff was there. Am I missing something?

You can be sued in California if the California court finds a sufficient connection. WOTC is in Seattle, in Washington State, BTW.

They can't necessarily enforce a judgement against you though. Do you have US assets?

Quote from: S'mon on March 24, 2024, 03:04:40 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 23, 2024, 12:59:52 PM
TWO: I thought that, since WotC is in Commiefornia, I would be dealing with USA law, I mean Sargon's IP trial was held in the USA because the plaintiff was there. Am I missing something?

You can be sued in California if the California court finds a sufficient connection. WOTC is in Seattle, in Washington State, BTW.

They can't necessarily enforce a judgement against you though. Do you have US assets?

Nope, but I would be selling in US based webstores most likelly. Which means they could shut me down unless I decide to fight them for all eternity with all the billions I don't have to fight them...

The information in a stat block is basically uncopyrightable. The format is perhaps somewhat protectable, but not in itself; it has to express an original idea. The concept of one monster is probably not enough to constitute the "soul of the work" and probably cannot be copyrighted, but is likely to get you sued. Wholesale copying of large sections of a monster book will definitely get you sued, and could likely be an infringement of copyrightable material. The name of a monster is not, generally speaking, individually copyrightable.

Trademark is always fuzzy. But in general, if you are counterfeiting something, you are in violation, but if you are presenting an alternative to another brand, you're in the clear. A single name is not trademarkable unless it's distinctive and "famous." Like, you can't call random things Madonna, because there is a presumption you might be trading on the recognition of the name Madonna and leading people to assume it's somehow authorized.

You can get around almost all of that by ruthlessly parodying the original. While normally you want to avoid "defamatory" depictions of someone, when it comes to parody, usually you are better off the more vulgar and insulting your work is, because first of all, it's clearly not going to cause confusion with the original, and second, "opinion" isn't subject to libel, slander, or defamation law, which includes general nonsense and absurdities.

IANAL, your mileage may vary, large IP corps in the mirror may be closer than they appear.

Quote from: pawsplay on March 25, 2024, 04:48:38 AM
The information in a stat block is basically uncopyrightable. The format is perhaps somewhat protectable, but not in itself; it has to express an original idea. The concept of one monster is probably not enough to constitute the "soul of the work" and probably cannot be copyrighted, but is likely to get you sued. Wholesale copying of large sections of a monster book will definitely get you sued, and could likely be an infringement of copyrightable material. The name of a monster is not, generally speaking, individually copyrightable.

Trademark is always fuzzy. But in general, if you are counterfeiting something, you are in violation, but if you are presenting an alternative to another brand, you're in the clear. A single name is not trademarkable unless it's distinctive and "famous." Like, you can't call random things Madonna, because there is a presumption you might be trading on the recognition of the name Madonna and leading people to assume it's somehow authorized.

You can get around almost all of that by ruthlessly parodying the original. While normally you want to avoid "defamatory" depictions of someone, when it comes to parody, usually you are better off the more vulgar and insulting your work is, because first of all, it's clearly not going to cause confusion with the original, and second, "opinion" isn't subject to libel, slander, or defamation law, which includes general nonsense and absurdities.

IANAL, your mileage may vary, large IP corps in the mirror may be closer than they appear.

With the exception of real "monsters" (Dinosaurs, prehistoric beasts, extant animals and plants), I'm creating my own monsters, you might be able to draw a (this was inspired by X) line between some of them and famous monsters not in the public domain but I'm not using the original names except on mythical monsters that are in the public domain.

Hence my worry mostly about the stat block, I don't think they would sue me for my original work... But then again BIG IP corpos...

Quote from: S'mon on March 19, 2024, 05:55:08 PM

Quote from: Chris24601 on March 19, 2024, 04:01:55 PM
The base stat block (vs. the fluff text beneath it) is pretty much uncopyrightable. Closest you could probably get is a trademark infringement for using the same layout, fonts, and so forth that constitutes a "trade dress."

I teach IP Law for a living, this kinda made me wince 

Is that why when it comes to tables and charts, they're not copyrightable in relation to game mechanics (you can't copyright a number, basically)?

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 25, 2024, 01:42:42 PM

Quote from: pawsplay on March 25, 2024, 04:48:38 AM
The information in a stat block is basically uncopyrightable. The format is perhaps somewhat protectable, but not in itself; it has to express an original idea. The concept of one monster is probably not enough to constitute the "soul of the work" and probably cannot be copyrighted, but is likely to get you sued. Wholesale copying of large sections of a monster book will definitely get you sued, and could likely be an infringement of copyrightable material. The name of a monster is not, generally speaking, individually copyrightable.

Trademark is always fuzzy. But in general, if you are counterfeiting something, you are in violation, but if you are presenting an alternative to another brand, you're in the clear. A single name is not trademarkable unless it's distinctive and "famous." Like, you can't call random things Madonna, because there is a presumption you might be trading on the recognition of the name Madonna and leading people to assume it's somehow authorized.

You can get around almost all of that by ruthlessly parodying the original. While normally you want to avoid "defamatory" depictions of someone, when it comes to parody, usually you are better off the more vulgar and insulting your work is, because first of all, it's clearly not going to cause confusion with the original, and second, "opinion" isn't subject to libel, slander, or defamation law, which includes general nonsense and absurdities.

IANAL, your mileage may vary, large IP corps in the mirror may be closer than they appear.

With the exception of real "monsters" (Dinosaurs, prehistoric beasts, extant animals and plants), I'm creating my own monsters, you might be able to draw a (this was inspired by X) line between some of them and famous monsters not in the public domain but I'm not using the original names except on mythical monsters that are in the public domain.

Hence my worry mostly about the stat block, I don't think they would sue me for my original work... But then again BIG IP corpos...

Yeah, if its your own work/stats and you're just using the format... just use a different font and order of arrangement (i.e. if they have Armor Class, then Hit Points, then Movement, then Attacks, then attributes, then number appearing, then treasure type... For yours do Name, #App, Treas., Attributes, Armor, HP, Move, Actions or some other combo) and you're absolutely fine.

Just one recommendation to make it even more sure fire safe; don't even copy their stat numbers for the Dinos, animals, etc.; just make up your own numbers based on what makes sense to you. Then its all your work even if you are using similar types of statistics to another system (i.e. ones that measure how strong, how fast, how hard to hurt, etc.).

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 19, 2024, 03:36:04 PM
Please, if we could keep it to legal advice and not devolve into "you don't need no licence" arguments?

You actually don't need a license, which I'm sure you know.

Quote from: S'mon on March 19, 2024, 05:55:08 PM
I teach IP Law for a living, this kinda made me wince 

Wince away, you can't copyright the data in stat blocks period.


Here's the truth- all the law that applies has been settled in software debates from an industry that is massively large compared to this one.  This is not, and has never been a legal question.  Nor is a reasonable place to ask legal questions a forum.  This is a question of "will Hasbro sue me if I do X", and, surprise surprise, no one actually knows the answer to that.

So what should you do?  You're legally in the clear to copy almost the entirety of the rules in any player's handbook, DMG, or monster manual ever published.  But you don't want to lose everything on a lawsuit you can't afford, even though you are 100% in the clear.  It's not like the electronic freedom foundation is going to rush to your aid like they would an open source or free software programmer targeted by Microsoft. 

Here's what you should do, in order: 
1- Pay money to an actual lawyer with specialization in copyright or trademark to give you actual advice, then follow it.
2- Ok, you don't want to pay money.  Then what you can do is to copy what other companies with something to lose have done.  Look at what Paizo is doing, or what Autarch is doing.  It's all the rage to rename absolutely everything and not re-use anything that Hasbro has ever touched, so just do exactly what they are doing.  That's your best free option.

This isn't a law debate, it's a best-practices-so-as-to-not-get-lawfared debate.

Quote from: Chris24601 on March 25, 2024, 02:43:31 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 25, 2024, 01:42:42 PM

Quote from: pawsplay on March 25, 2024, 04:48:38 AM
The information in a stat block is basically uncopyrightable. The format is perhaps somewhat protectable, but not in itself; it has to express an original idea. The concept of one monster is probably not enough to constitute the "soul of the work" and probably cannot be copyrighted, but is likely to get you sued. Wholesale copying of large sections of a monster book will definitely get you sued, and could likely be an infringement of copyrightable material. The name of a monster is not, generally speaking, individually copyrightable.

Trademark is always fuzzy. But in general, if you are counterfeiting something, you are in violation, but if you are presenting an alternative to another brand, you're in the clear. A single name is not trademarkable unless it's distinctive and "famous." Like, you can't call random things Madonna, because there is a presumption you might be trading on the recognition of the name Madonna and leading people to assume it's somehow authorized.

You can get around almost all of that by ruthlessly parodying the original. While normally you want to avoid "defamatory" depictions of someone, when it comes to parody, usually you are better off the more vulgar and insulting your work is, because first of all, it's clearly not going to cause confusion with the original, and second, "opinion" isn't subject to libel, slander, or defamation law, which includes general nonsense and absurdities.

IANAL, your mileage may vary, large IP corps in the mirror may be closer than they appear.

With the exception of real "monsters" (Dinosaurs, prehistoric beasts, extant animals and plants), I'm creating my own monsters, you might be able to draw a (this was inspired by X) line between some of them and famous monsters not in the public domain but I'm not using the original names except on mythical monsters that are in the public domain.

Hence my worry mostly about the stat block, I don't think they would sue me for my original work... But then again BIG IP corpos...

Yeah, if its your own work/stats and you're just using the format... just use a different font and order of arrangement (i.e. if they have Armor Class, then Hit Points, then Movement, then Attacks, then attributes, then number appearing, then treasure type... For yours do Name, #App, Treas., Attributes, Armor, HP, Move, Actions or some other combo) and you're absolutely fine.

Just one recommendation to make it even more sure fire safe; don't even copy their stat numbers for the Dinos, animals, etc.; just make up your own numbers based on what makes sense to you. Then its all your work even if you are using similar types of statistics to another system (i.e. ones that measure how strong, how fast, how hard to hurt, etc.).

There's only so many ways to arrange the same info...

Not using the 5e stats, it's a nightmare of over complexity.

But I might say I'm using shit from their CC By SRD, just to cover my ass, I'm planing on putting most of the book under CC By anyway.

I will note that the first edition of The Kensei, by me, was released for 5e without any license at all, before there was even a 5e SRD. Nothing happened. But that could just be a matter of flying under the radar.

My book Retro Monster School, which is a conversion guide, has little or no copying of text, references multiple editions of D&D, and is under no license. But does use terminology and directly references several rules.