Suggestions for a OpenD6 System Trademark License

[Prime Evil]

Given that Eric has indicated that he will consider implementing an OpenD6 Trademark License developed by the community, it might be worth starting a thread to discuss what the terms of such a license might be. Anybody got any ideas?

[jasonga]

The key question we need to answer (and it's really Eric that needs to answer this - we're just guessing) is what does Eric and WEG want to gain from an STL?

WotC wanted to sell their players handbook, so they put in provisions that meant publishers couldn't create a complete game (no character generation & no experience system could be included from memory). But there are already multiple versions of D6 from WEG, so that doesn't seem like a possible requirement. Add in the (now on hiatus) OpenD6 to the equation, and it's not clear.

I guess the obvious requirement of an STL is that publishers can only use the attributes and experience systems from Adventure, Fantasy or Space - but that leaves out Cookbook and Legend fans (not to mention projects like Mini Six), and seems to go against the OpenD6 idea.

I remember one idea Eric mentioned was that all mechanics had to be OGL, and added to OpenD6 - that could be a reasonable requirement (if OpenD6 actually existed).

[Prime Evil]

To kick things off, here's some initial suggestions for a Opend6 trademark license...

Draft OpenD6 Trademark License

Preamble
This document contains a license to use the trademarks owned by Purgatory Publishing that are associated with the OpenD6 System. It describes the correct use of these licensed marks, and defines the rules, restrictions and limitations that you must abide by when using them.

Definitions

Licensed Marks
"Licensed Marks" means any and all of the following trademarks owned by Purgatory Publishing:

The D6 System Trademark logo
The OpenD6 Trademark logo
The trademark "D6 System"
The trademark "OpenD6 System"
West End Games
Purgatory Publishing


Excluded Licensed Marks
The following trademarks are explicitly excluded from this license:

The trademark "TORG"
The trademark "Masterbook"
The trademark "Bloodshadows"
The trademark "Shatterzone"
The trademark "Septimus"
The trademark "Fires of Amatsumara"


License to Use
You are hereby granted a non-transferable, non-exclusive, royalty-free license to use the Licensed Marks in accordance with the conditions specified in this document.

You may not use any of the excluded licensed marks unless you negotiate a separate licensing agreement with Purgatory Publishing, Inc

Acceptance of Terms
By using the licensed marks described above, you agree to be bound by the terms and conditions of the license.

Any other use of the licensed marks is strictly prohibited, with the exception of such use as is permitted under the “fair use” provisions of copyright law (e.g. reviews, newsworthy stories, academic works, etc).

Ownership of Trademarks
Purgatory Publishing retains the ownership of all trademarks described in this license at all times.

By using any Licensed Marks under the terms of this License, you agree not to contest the ownership of the Licensed Marks. In addition, you further agree and accept that the Licensed Marks constitute Product Identity as defined in the Open Game License.

Any derivative works that you produce under this license must contain a designation of product identity that includes the following text:

West End Games, WEG, D6 System, OpenD6 and the OpenD6 graphic logo are trademarks of Purgatory Publishing Inc. These trademarks and are used with permission under the terms of the OpenD6 System Trademark License. This product is not endorsed by West End Games or Purgatory Publishing Inc.

Restrictions on Usage

You may not use the terms D6 or OpenD6 in the main title of any work covered by this license. Only official D6 products from West End Games may use these terms in this way.
You may not use the trademarks Purgatory Publishing, West End Games or WEG anywhere except in the mandatory legal disclaimers required by this trademark license.
You must not duplicate the trade dress of any official D6 product from West End Games or present any work produced under this license in such a way that a reasonable person might conclude that it is an official D6 product from West End Games.
You may not state or imply that any product produced under this license is endorsed by West End Games or Purgatory Publishing inc.




OpenD6 Logo Usage

All works produced under the terms of this license must prominently display the official OpenD6 logo.

In the case of printed materials, the OpenD6 logo must appear the on the cover and first interior page of the work

If this is impossible (eg in an ASCII text file) the text “An OpenD6 Licensed Product” may be used instead.

You may not alter the color, typography or design of the OpenD6 logo. However, you are permitted convert the OpenD6 logo to greyscale for reproduction in black and white.

You are not permitted to stretch or distort the OpenD6 logo, although you are permitted to resize it - provided that the original proportions are retained.

The OpenD6 logo must always be reproduced at a size that is visible and legible.

You are not permitted to cover or obscure any portion of the OpenD6 logo.

Mandatory Text
The following mandatory text must be attached to any work created under the terms of this license:

This product contains derivative material based on the OpenD6 System released under the Open Game License. OpenD6 and the OpenD6 graphic logo are trademarks of Purgatory Publishing Inc. These trademarks and are used with permission under the terms of the OpenD6 System Trademark License. This product is not endorsed by West End Games or Purgatory Publishing, Inc.

The mandatory text must be reproduced in a legible font at a size no smaller than 10 points.

Compliance with the Open Game License
All works released under the OpenD6 Trademark License must comply with the terms and conditions of the Open Game License.

This license will automatically terminate if You fail to comply with the terms and conditions of the Open Game License and do not such breach within 30 days of becoming aware of it. Any existing sublicenses will survive the termination of the OpenD6 Trademark License license.

Designation of Open Game Content
You must clearly designate those portions of any work produced under this license that are released as Open Game Content (OGC)

Every work produced under this trademark license must contribute some new Open Game Content to the OpenD6 System.

You must release any new game mechanics or rules contained in works that you create under the terms of this license as Open Game Content (OGC) under the terms of the Open Game License (OGL). This includes any new advantages, disadvantages, special abilities, character templates, weapons, armor, equipment, spells, extranormal powers, creatures, races, etc.

A minimum 5% of any material produced under this license must be released as Open Game Content in compliance with the terms of the Open Game License. This may not include any material that has previously been released as Open Game Content.

By using the Licensed Marks described in this document, you agree that any Open Game Content created under the OpenD6 System Trademark License may be reproduced on the OpenD6 website at the discretion of Purgatory Publishing, inc or its agents.

You must make any Open Game Content that you release under this license available to the public in Rich Text Format (rtf) upon request within 90 days of publication.

Designation of Product Identity
You may designate certain material in any works that you create under this license as Product Identity as defined in the Open Game License.

You may designate any of the following content as Product Identity: trademarks, registered trademarks, proper names (characters, places, deities, etc), descriptive text, dialogue, plots, storylines, incidents, locations, and characters. Basically, You must release all game mechanics and associated text as Open Game Content, but You may designate setting-related material as Product Identity.

You may designate the cover art, interior art, and trade dress of any works that you produce under this license to be Product Identity as defined in the Open Game License.

[sycarion]

Scratch what I said. Prime Evil has it covered. I'd go along with it, especially the 5% part.

[jasonga]

Fantastic suggestion Prime Evil!

Stealing from the d20 STL, there are two ares that I can see that Eric might want:

Agreement not to Contest
By making use of and/or distributing material using the D6 System trademark under the terms of this License, You agree not to contest the ownership of the Licensed Articles.

Termination for Breach
In the event that You fail to comply with the terms of this License, You will be considered to be in breach of this License. Purgatory Publishing will attempt to notify you in writing**. Except as otherwise specified herein, you will have 30 days from the date of the notice (the "cure period") to cure the breach to the satisfaction of Purgatory Publishing. If, at the end of the cure period, the breach is not cured, Purgatory Publishing may terminate this License without further written notice to You.

** WotC used to require publishers to send in a Confirmation Card, that gave the publishers details so they could be contacted. I doubt Eric would want to do that though.

Effects of Termination
Upon termination, You shall immediately stop all use of the Licensed Articles and will destroy any inventory or marketing material in Your possession bearing the D6 System trademark logos. You will remove any use of the D6 System trademark logos from your advertising, web site, letterhead, or any other use. You must instruct any company or individual that You are or become aware of who is in possession of any materials distributed by You bearing the D6 System trademark logos to destroy those materials. You will solely bear any costs related to carrying out this term of the License.
In Purgatory Publishing sole discretion, Purgatory Publishing may allow You to continue to use the License for Licensed Articles which otherwise comply with the terms of the License.

Penalty for Failure to Comply with Termination Instructions
If You fail to comply with the Effects of Termination, Purgatory Publishing may, at its option, pursue litigation, for which You shall be responsible for all legal costs, against You to the full extent of the law for breach of contract, copyright and trademark infringement, damages and any other remedy available.

[redwulfe]

as I was writing my last post in the other thread I did not see this new thread. I think that trying to get an STL is the best choice, but I am not sure if it will be legally binding unless we talk to a lawyer to find out what absolutely needs to be in there. That being said I am willing to help pitch in to get that lawyer.

I think this is good but the termination clauses I think are required in a licensee agreement, I am not a lawyer so I could be wrong. Basically i think we need to add something in there for either party to be able to terminate the agreement and still keep there IP.

Red

[jasonga]

as I was writing my last post in the other thread I did not see this new thread. I think that trying to get an STL is the best choice, but I am not sure if it will be legally binding unless we talk to a lawyer to find out what absolutely needs to be in there.
Well, if we put together an STL that Eric likes, and he releases it saying "this is the STL for using the D6 logo", then it's binding until someone challenges it in court. Presumably anything we were able to put together he'd want to check with his own lawyer first though, to make sure there's nothing in there that would come back and bite him.


I think this is good but the termination clauses I think are required in a licensee agreement, I am not a lawyer so I could be wrong. Basically i think we need to add something in there for either party to be able to terminate the agreement and still keep there IP.
That's an important point, although I'm not sure that it's required. WotC didn't have a termination clause for publishers in their d20 STL license, and the Hasbro lawyers were involved in drawing it up. Of course, they could terminate it whenever they want (and did in 2009) because they had the clause that they could change the license at any time... which is always a nasty clause to have.

[Rosencrantz]

Fantastic suggestion Prime Evil!

Stealing from the d20 STL, there are two ares that I can see that Eric might want:

Agreement not to Contest
By making use of and/or distributing material using the D6 System trademark under the terms of this License, You agree not to contest the ownership of the Licensed Articles.

Termination for Breach
In the event that You fail to comply with the terms of this License, You will be considered to be in breach of this License. Purgatory Publishing will attempt to notify you in writing**. Except as otherwise specified herein, you will have 30 days from the date of the notice (the "cure period") to cure the breach to the satisfaction of Purgatory Publishing. If, at the end of the cure period, the breach is not cured, Purgatory Publishing may terminate this License without further written notice to You.

** WotC used to require publishers to send in a Confirmation Card, that gave the publishers details so they could be contacted. I doubt Eric would want to do that though.

Effects of Termination
Upon termination, You shall immediately stop all use of the Licensed Articles and will destroy any inventory or marketing material in Your possession bearing the D6 System trademark logos. You will remove any use of the D6 System trademark logos from your advertising, web site, letterhead, or any other use. You must instruct any company or individual that You are or become aware of who is in possession of any materials distributed by You bearing the D6 System trademark logos to destroy those materials. You will solely bear any costs related to carrying out this term of the License.
In Purgatory Publishing sole discretion, Purgatory Publishing may allow You to continue to use the License for Licensed Articles which otherwise comply with the terms of the License.

Penalty for Failure to Comply with Termination Instructions
If You fail to comply with the Effects of Termination, Purgatory Publishing may, at its option, pursue litigation, for which You shall be responsible for all legal costs, against You to the full extent of the law for breach of contract, copyright and trademark infringement, damages and any other remedy available.

This should all be changed to OpenD6 System trademark, OpenD6 System trademark logos, etc. I doubt Eric would grant anyone the D6 logos.

[jasonga]

This should all be changed to OpenD6 System trademark, OpenD6 System trademark logos, etc. I doubt Eric would grant anyone the D6 logos.
You're right - I only changed the cases of WotC and d20 in the text, and didn't think about the difference of D6 vs OpenD6.

[Rosencrantz]

as I was writing my last post in the other thread I did not see this new thread. I think that trying to get an STL is the best choice, but I am not sure if it will be legally binding unless we talk to a lawyer to find out what absolutely needs to be in there. That being said I am willing to help pitch in to get that lawyer.

I think this is good but the termination clauses I think are required in a licensee agreement, I am not a lawyer so I could be wrong. Basically i think we need to add something in there for either party to be able to terminate the agreement and still keep there IP.

Red

You're probably right, but if Eric were to accept something like this, then that would carry some weight, wouldn't it? I mean, the only person who could claim damage would be Eric.

[redwulfe]

Yes, but I would leery of signing something that I didn't have looked over myself anyway. But that doesn't matter as we will have it looked over even if the STL came fro Eric himself.

True a termination clause would not really be needed because just not using it terminates it.

Red

[Prime Evil]

Draft OpenD6 Trademark License (Version 2)

Preamble
This document contains a license to use the trademarks owned by Purgatory Publishing that are associated with the OpenD6 System. It describes the correct use of these licensed marks, and defines the rules, restrictions and limitations that you must abide by when using them.

Definitions

Licensed Articles
"Licensed Articles" means any and all of the following trademarks owned by Purgatory Publishing:

The D6 System Trademark logo
The OpenD6 Trademark logo
The trademark "D6 System"
The trademark "OpenD6 System"
West End Games
Purgatory Publishing


Excluded Licensed Articles
The following trademarks are explicitly excluded from this license:

The trademark "TORG"
The trademark "Masterbook"
The trademark "Bloodshadows"
The trademark "Shatterzone"
The trademark "Septimus"
The trademark "Fires of Amatsumara"


License to Use
You are hereby granted a non-transferable, non-exclusive, royalty-free license to use the Licensed Articles in accordance with the conditions specified in this document.

You may not use any of the Excluded Licensed Articles unless you negotiate a separate licensing agreement with Purgatory Publishing, Inc

Acceptance of Terms
By using the licensed marks described above, you agree to be bound by the terms and conditions of the license.

Any other use of the licensed marks is strictly prohibited, with the exception of such use as is permitted under the “fair use” provisions of copyright law (e.g. reviews, newsworthy stories, academic works, etc).

Ownership of Trademarks
Purgatory Publishing retains the ownership of all trademarks described in this license at all times.

Agreement Not to Contest
By using any Licensed Marks under the terms of this License, you agree not to contest the ownership of the Licensed Marks. In addition, you further agree and accept that the Licensed Marks constitute Product Identity as defined in the Open Game License.

Any derivative works that you produce under this license must contain a designation of product identity that includes the following text:

West End Games, WEG, D6 System, OpenD6 and the OpenD6 graphic logo are trademarks of Purgatory Publishing Inc. These trademarks and are used with permission under the terms of the OpenD6 System Trademark License. This product is not endorsed by West End Games or Purgatory Publishing Inc.

Restrictions on Usage

You may not use the terms D6 or OpenD6 in the main title of any work covered by this license. Only official D6 products from West End Games may use these terms in this way.
You may not use the trademarks Purgatory Publishing, West End Games or WEG anywhere except in the mandatory legal disclaimers required by this trademark license.
You must not duplicate the trade dress of any official D6 product from West End Games or present any work produced under this license in such a way that a reasonable person might conclude that it is an official D6 product from West End Games.
You may not state or imply that any product produced under this license is endorsed by West End Games or Purgatory Publishing inc.




OpenD6 Logo Usage

All works produced under the terms of this license must prominently display the official OpenD6 logo.

In the case of printed materials, the OpenD6 logo must appear the on the cover and first interior page of the work

If this is impossible (eg in an ASCII text file) the text “An OpenD6 Licensed Product” may be used instead.

You may not alter the color, typography or design of the OpenD6 logo. However, you are permitted convert the OpenD6 logo to greyscale for reproduction in black and white.

You are not permitted to stretch or distort the OpenD6 logo, although you are permitted to resize it - provided that the original proportions are retained.

The OpenD6 logo must always be reproduced at a size that is visible and legible.

You are not permitted to cover or obscure any portion of the OpenD6 logo.

Mandatory Text
The following mandatory text must be attached to any work created under the terms of this license:

This product contains derivative material based on the OpenD6 System released under the Open Game License. OpenD6 and the OpenD6 graphic logo are trademarks of Purgatory Publishing Inc. These trademarks and are used with permission under the terms of the OpenD6 System Trademark License. This product is not endorsed by West End Games or Purgatory Publishing, Inc.

The mandatory text must be reproduced in a legible font at a size no smaller than 10 points.

Marketing and Promotion
You may use the Licensed Articles for the purposes of marketing or promoting a work released under the terms and conditions of this license.

All marketing materials that utilize the Licensed Articles must incorporate the following text in a legible font and size:

The OpenD6 System and the OpenD6 System logo are trademarks of Purgatory Publishing and are used with permission.

Compliance with the Open Game License
All works released under the OpenD6 Trademark License must comply with the terms and conditions of the Open Game License.

This license will automatically terminate if You fail to comply with the terms and conditions of the Open Game License and do not such breach within 30 days of becoming aware of it. Any existing sublicenses will survive the termination of the OpenD6 Trademark License license.

Designation of Open Game Content
You must clearly designate those portions of any work produced under this license that are released as Open Game Content (OGC)

Every work produced under this trademark license must contribute some new Open Game Content to the OpenD6 System.

You must release any new game mechanics or rules contained in works that you create under the terms of this license as Open Game Content (OGC) under the terms of the Open Game License (OGL). This includes any new advantages, disadvantages, special abilities, character templates, weapons, armor, equipment, spells, extranormal powers, creatures, races, etc.

A minimum 5% of any material produced under this license must be released as Open Game Content in compliance with the terms of the Open Game License. This may not include any material that has previously been released as Open Game Content.

By using the Licensed Marks described in this document, you agree that any Open Game Content created under the OpenD6 System Trademark License may be reproduced on the OpenD6 website at the discretion of Purgatory Publishing, inc or its agents.

You must make any Open Game Content that you release under this license available to the public in Rich Text Format (rtf) upon request within 90 days of publication.

Designation of Product Identity
You may designate certain material in any works that you create under this license as Product Identity as defined in the Open Game License.

You may designate any of the following content as Product Identity: trademarks, registered trademarks, proper names (characters, places, deities, etc), descriptive text, dialogue, plots, storylines, incidents, locations, and characters. Basically, You must release all game mechanics and associated text as Open Game Content, but You may designate setting-related material as Product Identity.

You may designate the cover art, interior art, and trade dress of any works that you produce under this license to be Product Identity as defined in the Open Game License.

[Prime Evil]

(Draft license Version 2 - Continued)

Updates and Revisions
Purgatory Publishing may issue updates and/or revisions of the OpenD6 Trademark License without prior notice.

You may continue to distribute any pre-existing material under the older version of the license for 120 days after the publication of an updated version of the license.

New material must comply in all respects with the terms and conditions of the current version of the OpenD6 Trademark License.

Termination for Breach
In the event that You fail to comply with the terms of this License, You will be considered to be in breach of this License.

Purgatory Publishing will attempt to notify you in writing. If You cannot be contacted, you will be considered to be in breach of this License immediately.

Except as otherwise specified herein, you will have 30 days from the date of the notice (the "cure period") to cure the breach to the satisfaction of Purgatory Publishing.

If, at the end of the cure period, the breach is not cured, Purgatory Publishing may terminate this License without further written notice to You.

Effects of Termination
Upon termination, You shall immediately stop all use of the Licensed Articles and will destroy any inventory or marketing material in Your possession bearing the OpenD6 System trademark logos.

You will remove any use of the OpenD6 System trademark logos from your advertising, web site, letterhead, or any other use.

You must instruct any company or individual that You are or become aware of who is in possession of any materials distributed by You bearing the OpenD6 System trademark logos to destroy those materials. You will solely bear any costs related to carrying out this term of the License.

In Purgatory Publishing sole discretion, Purgatory Publishing may allow You to continue to use the License for Licensed Articles which otherwise comply with the terms of the License.

Any existing sublicenses will survive the termination of the OpenD6 Trademark License license.

Penalty for Failure to Comply with Termination Instructions
If You fail to comply with the Effects of Termination, Purgatory Publishing may, at its option, pursue litigation, for which You shall be responsible for all legal costs, against You to the full extent of the law for breach of contract, copyright and trademark infringement, damages and any other remedy available.

[Prime Evil]

You're probably right, but if Eric were to accept something like this, then that would carry some weight, wouldn't it? I mean, the only person who could claim damage would be Eric.

If Eric agrees to accept the license, it would become a legally binding contract between Eric and the licensee. It's definitely a good idea to get an attorney to check the wording of the draft once it is finished - but that's not mandatory. Just because a person signs a bad contract doesn't mean that it won't be legally enforceable.

[Prime Evil]

For the record, I think that it is worth putting together a draft STL and asking Eric whether he would be willing to accept it as an interim agreement. Maybe he will accept the proposal if it is reasonable. At the very least, this will give the community a better idea of where he stands at the moment - and it will give him a better idea of what the community wants from an OpenD6 STL.

I've added a clause that gives Eric some freedom to modify the STL in the future while providing publishers with a 180 day safety period to review any changes that he makes and decide whether they are acceptable. I believe that this is a decent compromise between Eric's need to retain control over his IP and the need of publishers to have some certainty about the future before they commit to a licensing agreement.

IMHO, there are still a few obvious things missing from the draft:

A definition of what kinds of products are covered by the license - does it merely cover traditional pen-and-paper RPGs, or can you use it to produce a computer game that uses the OpenD6 ruleset? What about computerized gaming aids, such as an OpenD6 ruleset for Fantasy Grounds?
A restriction on using the License in ways that infringe upon the intellectual property rights of third parties (e.g. publishing OpenD6 Star Wars material without a separate license from LucasFilm).
Clarification regarding OpenD6 conversions of third-party IP in instances where the owner of the Intellectual Property permits the production and noncommercial fan material - is this OK or not?

[jasonga]

At least we now know what Eric wants from an STL (http://www.wegfansite.com/forum/showpost.php?p=23775&postcount=28):


As I has said about a million effing times. The only requirement for the OpenD6 STL will be that newly created, non-IP material be sent to OpenD6 (or me in the interim, via email) for archiving and player access. That's it.

That gives us something to work with at least.

[Prime Evil]

At least we now know what Eric wants from an STL (http://www.wegfansite.com/forum/showpost.php?p=23775&postcount=28):

That gives us something to work with at least.

That's cool. The draft says that all OGC released under the STL must be made available to the public in Rich Text Format upon request and may be posted on the OpenD6 website at the discretion of Purgatory Publishing without further notice. I think that comes close to covering Eric's requirements.

Note that the draft makes it mandatory for publishers to contribute to the OpenD6 site - they must release a certain amount of new OGC, they must make it available in a portable format upon request, and they must agree for it to be posted on the OpenD6 site.

[Infinite Possibilities]

Last week I sent Paizo publishing an email and Vic said we cold borrow from their compatibility license as required.

Also, I would remove the restriction to not be able to use D6 in the title of your products. For one thing D6 as a term is not trademarked, so there is no reason to try to protect it. For another, D6 in the title only strengthens the OpenD6 logo, which in this case can only be a good thing.

Will have more comments when I have a chance to sit down and read it a bit more tonight.

Darren

[redwulfe]

You're probably right, but if Eric were to accept something like this, then that would carry some weight, wouldn't it? I mean, the only person who could claim damage would be Eric.

Yes it would, another reason, besides it being binding, that I am suggesting the lawyer is to protect Erics interests and the person going into the agreement. Not from being contractually obligating but from being contractually obligating to a fault. What if some nefarious person comes along, not that from what I have seen would happen, and tries to use the document to hurt the parties in question because it is contractually obligating. That's why some companies were told by their lawyers not to use the STL from WoTC. Now I trust that Eric is a good guy and from his actions of giving the system to the community I can say with certainty that he is a good guy but what if we word it wrong and Eric says yes that's cool and doesn't have the time to go get it checked out and it is used against him or the other party. Maybe i'm just overly paranoid when it comes to legal matters do to my lack of knowledge on the matter. but I don't think a lawyers consultation on the matter would be that expensive and I am willing to help pay for it.

That being said the lawyer I hired the last time to talk me through copyrights and trademarks seems to have a few things mixed up so it may not matter at all. But since Eric has said that he is amendable to the suggestion maybe we can take the time to really make sure it is fully sound before presenting it to him.

I am of course willing to continue anyway I am merely putting out the suggestion not an objection.

Red

[redwulfe]

Last week I sent Paizo publishing an email and Vic said we cold borrow from their compatibility license as required.
Darren

That's really nice of him and very helpful too.

Red

[redwulfe]

I've added a clause that gives Eric some freedom to modify the STL in the future while providing publishers with a 180 day safety period to review any changes that he makes and decide whether they are acceptable. I believe that this is a decent compromise between Eric's need to retain control over his IP and the need of publishers to have some certainty about the future before they commit to a licensing agreement.
This is much better than what I recall in the WotC agreement where they could change it without notification and it was binding upon them changing it.

Red

[Prime Evil]

This is much better than what I recall in the WotC agreement where they could change it without notification and it was binding upon them changing it.

Red

Yeah...that's one of the things that we want to avoid. Remember that an agreement such as this is binding on both parties - it's basically a contract.

[Prime Evil]

Last week I sent Paizo publishing an email and Vic said we cold borrow from their compatibility license as required.


Vic is one of the nicest guys in the industry. For me, Paizo provide the best model of how the Open Gaming movement should work. They are generous with their IP, helpful to new companies, and provide superb customer service. And they still manage to generate a decent profit :D

[Infinite Possibilities]

Ok, here are my thoughts on the draft.

Under Restrictions of Use, I would completely get rid of item 1.

One, Eric hasn't given any indication that he wants to retain the rights to use D6 or OpenD6 in his products.

Two, it only hurts the other publishers that want to publish items, if they cant use D6 or OpenD6 in the title of there products. Since third party publishers will be the driving force behind OpenD6 right now, I don't think it would be wise to cut them off at the knees.

Finally, D6 is used in most fan produced content, there is no reason to make everyone else drop it, just to use the OpenD6 logo, which is supposed to help, not hinder the compatibility factor.

Is there any particular reason for the part on OpenD6 logo usage? I guess I just don't see the value add to the STL with the restrictions.

Under Designation of Open Game Content I think requiring the book to "contribute some new Open Game Content to the OpenD6 System." is a bad idea. It really puts shackles on people who are just making settings and adding in the rules for reference.

Besides, I think the next paragraph is actually better, It says if you create anything new for rules you have to release it.

"A minimum 5% of any material produced under this license must be released as Open Game Content in compliance with the terms of the Open Game License. This may not include any material that has previously been released as Open Game Content."

I think this one is a bad idea as well. Requiring a certain amount to be open is just another shackle added to publishers without any added value to the license or the community. It prevents people from using the license rather than encouraging it. Besides, who is going to judge 5% of new content not already open?

"By using the Licensed Marks described in this document, you agree that any Open Game Content created under the OpenD6 System Trademark License may be reproduced on the OpenD6 website at the discretion of Purgatory Publishing, inc or its agents."

This one is also not needed. By using the open license they have not only agreed to Purgatory Publishing putting open content on their web site, but the rest of the world as well.

"You must make any Open Game Content that you release under this license available to the public in Rich Text Format (rtf) upon request within 90 days of publication."

For how long? One year, two? 20 years? 100 years?

You may also want to put in that they must send the OGL material to Pergetory publishing, or the OpenD6.com website.

"Updates and Revisions

You may continue to distribute any pre-existing material under the older version of the license for 120 days after the publication of an updated version of the license."

I think this one should say "You may continue to distribute any pre-existing material under the older version of the license."

That way we are preventing the publishers from having to destroy product on the whim of Eric or anyone he sells the business too.

Darren

[redwulfe]

I think this one should say "You may continue to distribute any pre-existing material under the older version of the license."

That way we are preventing the publishers from having to destroy product on the whim of Eric or anyone he sells the business too.


Is there a way to say it so that the currently printed material can finish being distributed but further print urns need to lose the logo and such?

This is a middle ground so they do have the option of saying you can't use the logo anymore but please finish distributing what you have.

Red

[Infinite Possibilities]

Is there a way to say it so that the currently printed material can finish being distributed but further print urns need to lose the logo and such?

This is a middle ground so they do have the option of saying you can't use the logo anymore but please finish distributing what you have.

Red

I suppose you could just state it as you have:

You may continue to distribute any pre-existing material under the older version of the license until the existing print run is completed. All new print runs of the product must follow the new guidelines as presented in the latest version of the license.

Something like that maybe?

Darren

[redwulfe]

Exactly, I think this keeps people, or possibly just me, from cringing at the thought that I would have to destroy books that I worked very hard to put out and keeps the ability to protect the IP in Eric's court.

Thanks Darren

Red

[hellsreach]

The standard "friendly" way to do it is to give the licensee a time period to legally sell the product. I have not problem doing away with the time period, and simply stating that existing physical product may be sold, but no new material may be printed with the trademarks.

Of course, the material could still be reprinted sans the logos and D6 references perpetually, since the OGL is irrevocable for previous iterations of the the OpenD6 material.

[hellsreach]

Let's not forget a standards of decency clause, per reasonable society, yadda yadda, as well as any material that, with publication, could cause direct and serious harm to the value of the OpenD6 brand.

No one wants a Fatal D6, now. ;)

[redwulfe]

Ah, the ol' book of erotic D6, I guess will have to wait. :)

Red

[hellsreach]

I believe the using in your title is perfectly acceptable. My only issue is for the logo itself. This licenses the OpenD6 logo only (not the older deckled D6 logo). "D6" as a material identifier is not only acceptable, but I think increases immediate brand recognition and should be encouraged (but in no way required).

Logo stipulations are important. The logo should be on the front or back cover, should be reproduced at a size appropriate for easy recognition, and should not be obstructed by other text of graphics.

[Jamfke]

Ah, the ol' book of erotic D6, I guess will have to wait. :)

Red

Nah, somebody would just go the plain brown wrapper route, and not mention compatibility!

:eek:

[hellsreach]

Ah, the ol' book of erotic D6, I guess will have to wait. :)

Red

Well... I'm a VERY liberal judge of "decency. I'm less worried about sexually explicit, than I am about sexually explicit and dumb.

But the clause is primarily to avoid overtly racist material.

[Infinite Possibilities]

Logo stipulations are important. The logo should be on the front or back cover, should be reproduced at a size appropriate for easy recognition, and should not be obstructed by other text of graphics.

I can see that have a clearly recognizable logo is important. I guess my question was, if someone is going to go through all the trouble of abiding by the license, in theory to get the logo, why would they hide it? What purpose would it serve to do so? And would it hurt the community in any way if they did?

Is the whole point of the stipulation to make sure that the logo gets advertised as much as possible?

Darren

[Prime Evil]

Ok, here are my thoughts on the draft.

Under Restrictions of Use, I would completely get rid of item 1.

One, Eric hasn't given any indication that he wants to retain the rights to use D6 or OpenD6 in his products.

Two, it only hurts the other publishers that want to publish items, if they cant use D6 or OpenD6 in the title of there products. Since third party publishers will be the driving force behind OpenD6 right now, I don't think it would be wise to cut them off at the knees.

Finally, D6 is used in most fan produced content, there is no reason to make everyone else drop it, just to use the OpenD6 logo, which is supposed to help, not hinder the compatibility factor.


Agreed. That term was probably a bit too restrictive. Eric has indicated that this restriction isn't necessary, so consider it gone :D


Is there any particular reason for the part on OpenD6 logo usage? I guess I just don't see the value add to the STL with the restrictions.

These restrictions are needed for two reasons - to prevent people from producing rip offs of the OpenD6 logo and to ensure all products released under the STL maintain a consistent brand identity. The latter point is definitely important to WEG, since it helps to build the profile of the D6 system as a coherent brand.


Under Designation of Open Game Content I think requiring the book to "contribute some new Open Game Content to the OpenD6 System." is a bad idea. It really puts shackles on people who are just making settings and adding in the rules for reference.

This is a difficult point. I understand your concerns and I'm very sympathetic to them. But I included this restriction in the draft for two reasons:


To ensure that all works released under the STL contribute some material to the OpenD6 website.
To eliminate dodgy declarations of Open Game Content such as those used by White Wolf which read something like "We declare anything in this work previously released as OGC by somebody else as OGC and everything else as product identity". Such declarations technically comply with the terms of the Open Game License while subverting its original intention. This sort of legal trickery is obnoxious and is one of the things that led WoTC to replace the OGL with the GSL when they released 4e.


If anybody has a better solution to this problem, I'd love to hear it.


Besides, I think the next paragraph is actually better, It says if you create anything new for rules you have to release it.

Thanks. I'm not sure that this is strong enough on its own though.


"A minimum 5% of any material produced under this license must be released as Open Game Content in compliance with the terms of the Open Game License. This may not include any material that has previously been released as Open Game Content."

I think this one is a bad idea as well. Requiring a certain amount to be open is just another shackle added to publishers without any added value to the license or the community. It prevents people from using the license rather than encouraging it. Besides, who is going to judge 5% of new content not already open?

Please note that this clause does not specify that all of the 5% must be new OGC!

In many cases, simply declaring all NPC statblocks as OGC may be enough to satisfy this condition.

However, based upon feedback from other folks here it might work better if we drop the minimum OGC requirement to 1%. What do you reckon?

Once again, this restriction exists to encourage people to open up at least some of their material for re-use by Eric and other OpenD6 publishers.


"By using the Licensed Marks described in this document, you agree that any Open Game Content created under the OpenD6 System Trademark License may be reproduced on the OpenD6 website at the discretion of Purgatory Publishing, inc or its agents."

This one is also not needed. By using the open license they have not only agreed to Purgatory Publishing putting open content on their web site, but the rest of the world as well.

You're absolutely right that this clause isn't necessary from a legal perspective, but it makes sense from a business perspective to ensure that everybody who signs up to the STL understands that their OGC may be posted on the Opend6 website. Believe it or not, a lot of RPG publishers don't like to see competitors reproducing material that they have released as OGC in order to satisfy the terms of the OGL.


"You must make any Open Game Content that you release under this license available to the public in Rich Text Format (rtf) upon request within 90 days of publication."

For how long? One year, two? 20 years? 100 years?

You may also want to put in that they must send the OGL material to Purgetory publishing, or the OpenD6.com website.

I'm a bit torn about this one. The idea of having OGC available in a convenient format appeals to me. But once the OpenD6 website goes live, the need for this condition may vanish. If Eric could clarify how he would like publishers to submit OGC for inclusion on the OpenD6 site, this may go a long way towards clarifying this point.



"Updates and Revisions

You may continue to distribute any pre-existing material under the older version of the license for 120 days after the publication of an updated version of the license."

I think this one should say "You may continue to distribute any pre-existing material under the older version of the license."

That way we are preventing the publishers from having to destroy product on the whim of Eric or anyone he sells the business too.


Eric has clarified his thoughts on this point and I intend to incorporate his thoughts into the next draft.

[Prime Evil]

Given that Vic Wertz has kindly granted permission to use wording from the Pathfinder compatibility license developed by Paizo, how about we borrow their wording for the key section of the license:

License Grant
If you are in compliance with all of the terms and conditions of this License, you will be granted a non-transferable, non-sublicensable, non-exclusive, royalty-free license to use the OpenD6 licensed articles in printed books, electronic books, and freely available websites in connection with products that are compatible with the OpenD6 Game System, subject to the obligations and limitations set forth in this License.

You may use the OpenD6 Logo only to indicate that your product is compatible with the OpenD6 Roleplaying System. The logo may only be used on OpenD6 compatible products and in advertisements and websites directly promoting those products. The OpenD6 logo may only be used in the manner specified in this License and may not be modified except as specifically set forth in the Usage Requirements.

The OpenD6 Logo may only be used under this License in connection with materials you publish under the Open Gaming License 1.0a ("OGL"). You may not use the OpenD6 Logo in any way that the OGL prohibits. (Note that you are solely responsible for assuring you use the OGL correctly.) The OpenD6 Logo is designated as Product Identity as that term is defined in the OGL.

No license or permission is granted (either expressly or by implication) with respect to any trademarks, copyrights, or other intellectual property right except the Licensed Articles specified in this document, and any right not specifically granted hereunder is expressly reserved to Purgatory Publishing.

You may not use the Licensed Articles in a way that suggests West End Games or Purgatory Publishing endorses or is in any way responsible for any part of your product, or for any conduct of your business, or that suggests that you have any relationship with these entities beyond a mere license, unless a separate agreement has been negotiated that lets you do so. In addition, you also may not state or suggest that West End Games or Purgatory Publishing guarantees your product's compatibility with the OpenD6 Roleplaying System.

Purgatory Publishing makes no warranties about the suitability of the OpenD6 Logo or the License for your business. Purgatory Publishing is not obligated to provide support for your use of the OpenD6 Logo. Purgatory Publishing may not be held liable for any damages (incidental, consequential, or otherwise) resulting for your use of the OpenD6 Logo or your agreeing to this License.

You agree to defend, indemnify and hold Purgatory Publishing harmless from any claims, demands or suits brought with respect to any products produced by or for you.

[Prime Evil]

Draft OpenD6 Trademark License (Version 3.0)

Preamble
This document contains a license to use the trademarks owned by Purgatory Publishing that are associated with the OpenD6 System. It describes the correct use of these licensed marks, and defines the rules, restrictions and limitations that you must abide by when using them.

Definitions

Licensed Articles
"Licensed Articles" means any and all of the following trademarks owned by Purgatory Publishing:

The D6 System Trademark logo
The OpenD6 Trademark logo
The trademark "D6 System"
The trademark "OpenD6 System"
West End Games
Purgatory Publishing


Excluded Licensed Articles
The following trademarks are explicitly excluded from this license:

The trademark "TORG"
The trademark "Masterbook"
The trademark "Bloodshadows"
The trademark "Shatterzone"
The trademark "Septimus"
The trademark "Fires of Amatsumara"


License to Use
You are hereby granted non-transferable, non-sublicensable, non-exclusive, royalty-free license to use the Licensed Articles in printed books, electronic books, and freely available websites in connection with products that are compatible with the OpenD6 Game System, subject to the obligations and limitations set forth in this License.

You may not use any of the Excluded Licensed Articles unless you negotiate a separate licensing agreement with Purgatory Publishing, Inc

No license or permission is granted (either expressly or by implication) with respect to any trademarks, copyrights, or other intellectual property right except the Licensed Articles specified in this document, and any right not specifically granted hereunder is expressly reserved to Purgatory Publishing.

Acceptance of Terms
By using the licensed marks described above, you agree to be bound by the terms and conditions of the license.

Any other use of the licensed marks is strictly prohibited, with the exception of such use as is permitted under the “fair use” provisions of copyright law (e.g. reviews, newsworthy stories, academic works, etc).

Ownership of Trademarks
Purgatory Publishing retains the ownership of all trademarks described in this license at all times.

Agreement Not to Contest
By using any Licensed Marks under the terms of this License, you agree not to contest the ownership of the Licensed Marks. In addition, you further agree and accept that the Licensed Marks constitute Product Identity as defined in the Open Game License.

Any derivative works that you produce under this license must contain a designation of product identity that includes the following text:

West End Games, WEG, D6 System, OpenD6 and the OpenD6 graphic logo are trademarks of Purgatory Publishing Inc. These trademarks and are used with permission under the terms of the OpenD6 System Trademark License. This product is not endorsed by West End Games or Purgatory Publishing Inc.

Restrictions on Usage

You may not use the trademarks Purgatory Publishing, West End Games or WEG anywhere except in the mandatory legal disclaimers required by this trademark license.
You must not duplicate the trade dress of any official D6 product from West End Games or present any work produced under this license in such a way that a reasonable person might conclude that it is an official D6 product from West End Games.
You may not use the Licensed Articles in a way that suggests or implies that Purgatory Publishing endorses or is in any way responsible for any part of your product, or for any conduct of your business, or that suggests that you have any relationship with these entities beyond this license, unless a separate agreement has been negotiated that lets you do so.
You also may not state or suggest that Purgatory Publishing,inc guarantees your product's compatibility with the OpenD6 Roleplaying System.
You must use your best efforts to preserve the high standard of the OpenD6 trademarks. You may not use this License for products that the general public would classify as offensive or inappropriate for minors.




OpenD6 Logo Usage

All works produced under the terms of this license must prominently display the official OpenD6 logo.

In the case of printed materials, the OpenD6 logo must appear the on the cover or back cover of the work and should be reproduced at a size appropriate for easy recognition.

If this is impossible (eg in an ASCII text file) the text “An OpenD6 Licensed Product” may be used instead.

You may use the OpenD6 Logo only to indicate that your product is compatible with the OpenD6 Roleplaying System. The logo may only be used on OpenD6 compatible products and in advertisements and websites directly promoting those products.

You may not alter the color, typography or design of the OpenD6 logo. However, you are permitted convert the OpenD6 logo to greyscale for reproduction in black and white.

You are not permitted to stretch or distort the OpenD6 logo, although you are permitted to resize it - provided that the original proportions are retained.

The OpenD6 logo must always be reproduced at a size that is visible and legible.

You are not permitted to cover or obscure any portion of the OpenD6 logo.

Mandatory Text
The following mandatory text must be attached to any work created under the terms of this license:

This product contains derivative material based on the OpenD6 System released under the Open Game License. OpenD6 and the OpenD6 graphic logo are trademarks of Purgatory Publishing Inc. These trademarks and are used with permission under the terms of the OpenD6 System Trademark License. This product is not endorsed by West End Games or Purgatory Publishing, Inc.

The mandatory text must be reproduced in a legible font at a size no smaller than 10 points.

Marketing and Promotion
You may use the Licensed Articles for the purposes of marketing or promoting a work released under the terms and conditions of this license.

All marketing materials that utilize the Licensed Articles must incorporate the following text in a legible font and size:

The OpenD6 System and the OpenD6 System logo are trademarks of Purgatory Publishing and are used with permission.

Compliance with the Open Game License
All works released under the OpenD6 Trademark License must comply with the terms and conditions of the Open Game License.

The Licensed Articles may only be used in connection with materials you publish under the Open Gaming License 1.0a ("OGL").

You may not use the Licensed Articles in any way that the OGL prohibits. You are solely responsible for ensuring you use the OGL correctly.

The Licensed Articles are designated as Product Identity as that term is defined in the OGL.

This license will automatically terminate if You fail to comply with the terms and conditions of the Open Game License and do not such breach within 30 days of becoming aware of it. Any existing sublicenses will survive the termination of the OpenD6 Trademark License license.

Designation of Open Game Content
You must clearly designate those portions of any work produced under this license that are released as Open Game Content (OGC)

Every work produced under this trademark license must contribute some new Open Game Content to the OpenD6 System.

You must release any new game mechanics or rules contained in works that you create under the terms of this license as Open Game Content (OGC) under the terms of the Open Game License (OGL). This includes any new advantages, disadvantages, special abilities, character templates, weapons, armor, equipment, spells, extranormal powers, creatures, races, etc.

A minimum 1% of any material produced under this license must be released as Open Game Content in compliance with the terms of the Open Game License.

By using the Licensed Marks described in this document, you agree that any Open Game Content created under the OpenD6 System Trademark License may be reproduced on the OpenD6 website at the discretion of Purgatory Publishing, inc or its agents.

You must make any Open Game Content that you release under this license available to Purgatory Publishing upon request in a format suitable for posting on the OpenD6 website.

Designation of Product Identity
You may designate certain material in any works that you create under this license as Product Identity as defined in the Open Game License.

You may designate any of the following content as Product Identity: trademarks, registered trademarks, proper names (characters, places, deities, etc), descriptive text, dialogue, plots, storylines, incidents, locations, and characters. Basically, You must release all game mechanics and associated text as Open Game Content, but You may designate setting-related material as Product Identity.

You may designate the cover art, interior art, and trade dress of any works that you produce under this license to be Product Identity as defined in the Open Game License.

[Prime Evil]

Draft OpenD6 Trademark License (Version 3.0) - Continued

Updates and Revisions
Purgatory Publishing may issue updates and/or revisions of the OpenD6 Trademark License without prior notice.

You may continue to distribute any pre-existing material under the older version of the license, but no new material may be published using an old version of the license.

New material must comply in all respects with the terms and conditions of the current version of the OpenD6 Trademark License.

Termination for Breach
In the event that You fail to comply with the terms of this License, You will be considered to be in breach of this License.

Purgatory Publishing will attempt to notify you in writing. If You cannot be contacted, you will be considered to be in breach of this License immediately.

Except as otherwise specified herein, you will have 30 days from the date of the notice (the "cure period") to cure the breach to the satisfaction of Purgatory Publishing.

If, at the end of the cure period, the breach is not cured, Purgatory Publishing may terminate this License without further written notice to You.

Effects of Termination
Upon termination, You shall immediately stop all use of the Licensed Articles and will destroy any inventory or marketing material in Your possession bearing the OpenD6 System trademark logos.

You will remove any use of the OpenD6 System trademark logos from your advertising, web site, letterhead, or any other use.

You must instruct any company or individual that You are or become aware of who is in possession of any materials distributed by You bearing the OpenD6 System trademark logos to destroy those materials. You will solely bear any costs related to carrying out this term of the License.

In Purgatory Publishing sole discretion, Purgatory Publishing may allow You to continue to use the License for Licensed Articles which otherwise comply with the terms of the License.

Any existing sublicenses will survive the termination of the OpenD6 Trademark License license.

Penalty for Failure to Comply with Termination Instructions
If You fail to comply with the Effects of Termination, Purgatory Publishing may, at its option, pursue litigation, for which You shall be responsible for all legal costs, against You to the full extent of the law for breach of contract, copyright and trademark infringement, damages and any other remedy available.

Warranties and Limitation of Liability
Purgatory Publishing makes no warranties about the suitability of the Licensed Articles or the OpenD6 System Trademark License for your business.

Purgatory Publishing is not obligated to provide support for your use of the Licensed Articles.

Purgatory Publishing may not be held liable for any damages (incidental, consequential, or otherwise) resulting for your use of the Licensed Articles or your agreeing to this License.

Indemnification
You agree to defend, indemnify and hold Purgatory Publishing harmless from any claims, demands or suits brought with respect to any products produced by or for you.

[Prime Evil]

Whew! It's long...but I think it's getting close to covering all of the key points.

[Infinite Possibilities]

Looks great!

[Rosencrantz]

On "Every work produced under this license must contribute some new Open Game Content..." What if I published a work and two years later I wanted to correct a few spelling errors but didn't want to add anything new? Could I do that? Or what if I had made "Rosencrantzes Big Book of Stuff, volumes 1 and 2", then later I wanted to combine them into a single work? I made new stuff in each volume, but now none of it is new now. My hands would seem to be tied.

Also, Eric said that he wants OpenD6.com to work in a way that might not jibe with this STL. Someone could go onto that site, select a bunch of game rules, not add anything new, and then not be able to use this STL. Since Eric owns the trademarks, that wouldn't be a problem, but it would force him to either not allow anyone to do that, or he would have to create a new STL specifically allowing that. Two STLs are probably more than a system needs.

I'm not trying to be a spoilsport, but ultimately Eric seems to have said the only thing he wants out of it is that everything be emailed to him until OpenD6.com is functional, and submitted to OpenD6.com afterwords.

I would offer that be worded this way:

By using the Licensed Marks described in this document, you agree to submit all Open Game Content created under the OpenD6 System Trademark License to OpenD6.com within thirty days after the date of publication or release to the public. In the event that OpenD6.com is non-functional or non-operational, you may instead submit your content to the email address hellsreach@gmail.com. All content submitted to the email address must be submitted as an attached .txt or .rtf file.

[Jamfke]

By using the Licensed Marks described in this document, you agree to submit all Open Game Content created under the OpenD6 System Trademark License to OpenD6.com within thirty days after the date of publication or release to the public. In the event that OpenD6.com is non-functional or non-operational, you may instead submit your content to the email address hellsreach@gmail.com. All content submitted to the email address must be submitted as an attached .txt or .rtf file.

I like this better. It is more in keeping with what Eric has mentioned before.

[Prime Evil]

On "Every work produced under this license must contribute some new Open Game Content..." What if I published a work and two years later I wanted to correct a few spelling errors but didn't want to add anything new? Could I do that? Or what if I had made "Rosencrantzes Big Book of Stuff, volumes 1 and 2", then later I wanted to combine them into a single work? I made new stuff in each volume, but now none of it is new now. My hands would seem to be tied..

I see your concern and I agree that it is worth clarifying this point.

I would argue that you would be covered because the changes that you mention would not constitute a new work of authorship. However, this argument might not stand up in court because the 17 U.S.C. § 101 (1994) extended the definition of derivative works to include editorial revisions.

I would suggest adding a clause like this:

A work is exempt from the requirement to contribute new OGC if it is a compilation, correction, abridgment, potation, translation, or editorial revision of an existing work that complies with the terms of this license. Derivative works are not exempt from the requirement to contribute new OGC if they modify, extend, or transform the existing work in any other manner that constitutes an original work of authorship.


Also, Eric said that he wants OpenD6.com to work in a way that might not jibe with this STL. Someone could go onto that site, select a bunch of game rules, not add anything new, and then not be able to use this STL. Since Eric owns the trademarks, that wouldn't be a problem, but it would force him to either not allow anyone to do that, or he would have to create a new STL specifically allowing that. Two STLs are probably more than a system needs.

I'm not entirely sure that I follow your reasoning here. If a person generates a new set of game rules from the official OpenD6 site they are doing so with the consent of the owner of the IP. This means that they are free to use this material in any way that the owner of the IP permits - and this may include reproduction and redistribution. The STL only comes into force if all of the material is OGC and you want to use it to create a derivative work based upon that OGC.


I'm not trying to be a spoilsport, but ultimately Eric seems to have said the only thing he wants out of it is that everything be emailed to him until OpenD6.com is functional, and submitted to OpenD6.com afterwords.

That was what he said originally, but since the discussion here got started he has stipulated a number of additional requirements. For example, he has indicated that he wants a community decency clause and some restrictions on the usage of the OpenD6 logo.

Most of the other clauses in the agreement outlined above are fairly standard for an Intellectual Property license. Nonetheless, the draft STL is extremely generous for a trademark license. In the commercial world, a trademark license typically contains provisions like this:


At any time the Owner of the Trademark may direct the manner of use of the Trademark by the Licensee, and the Licensee shall observe and obey any and all such directions relating to the character and/or standards of quality of the Services offered by the Licensee in relation to the Trademark.

And:


The Licensee shall permit the Owner or its authorized representatives at all reasonable times to inspect the Licensee's marketing materials, marketing plans or proposals, and any and all related materials for the purpose of performing an audit of the Licensee's conformity with the standards of character and quality of service stipulated by the Owner of the Trademark.

The draft STL is very mild as far as IP licenses go, and is in line with the trademark licenses adopted by other publishers who use the OGL.



I would offer that be worded this way:

By using the Licensed Marks described in this document, you agree to submit all Open Game Content created under the OpenD6 System Trademark License to OpenD6.com within thirty days after the date of publication or release to the public. In the event that OpenD6.com is non-functional or non-operational, you may instead submit your content to the email address hellsreach@gmail.com. All content submitted to the email address must be submitted as an attached .txt or .rtf file.

I like this wording - it's one of the sections of the draft STL that has deliberately been left vague because I didn't know exactly what method of submission Eric was looking for. If he agrees to this wording, it should definitely be incorporated into the draft license.

[harmyn]

I think overall you guys are coming up with what will be a very usable document. I have only 2 big concens over the way it currently reads.

My first issue is the requirement of including new OGL material with all usage of the STL. What if 5 years from now someone comes up with a mythic new fantasy novel series that rivals Tolkien's Middle Earth and wants to release an RPG of it for their favorite cinematic system, D6. All the rules they need are already out there and works perfectly as they are. In order to use the logo/STL they would have to release some of their fantasy fiction (characters, locations, names, etc.) to the OGL in order to comply with the requirements. OR, they have to come up with rules they feel is unnecessary and serve no need other than to fill the needs new OGL material requirement. This is an extreme example, but it does illustrate the problem with making such a requirement mandatory.

My 2nd issue is the minimum requirements for OGL content listed in books. It sounds like only a small amount, but how do you calculate it? Is it 1% of all words written? If someone churns out a 100,000 word setting, would including a 1,000 word summary of the basic conflict resolution rules meet this requirement? Or is it again all new material? Also, who would work to measure works to confirm they meet the requirement. That would seem like a tedius bit of work.

Also, I had an idea for something long ago, it was a group of options/characters/ideas that could be released in various volumes. If I released 4 64 page volumes of Harmyn's Book of Nifties and then want to put them all together for a Omnibus edition that combines them all into a single 256 page book, I would not be able to because nothing new is being added. While this restriction may not be the intent, it is how it reads.

I understand the concerns that someone could swoop in and take someone's work and print a dirivative work, or outright rip-off of someone else's efforts, but it still falls into the issue of quality. If someone is attempting it as a quickie way to make some money the issue defaults to one of quality. If you come up with new rules and an interesting setting you make OGL, then someone swoops in and tries to rip it off with their own version of it, it is doubtful they spent the money on art or put forth the effort on making a quality layout. If they did, then they aren't really going to be making quick money and so won't put forth the effort. As I noted to a friend the other day, a quote from Niel Gaiman comes to mind (and the wording might not be exact but the meaning is there), "Writers should be less worried that someone will steal their works than whether or not anyone actually reads their works."


I would suggest that the restrictions stay as closely as possible to what Eric has requested to keep it simpler for all. That would be the submission to OpenD6.com or to him in txt/rtf files, the decencancy clause, and was there something else? I am suddenly drawing a blank.

Just my thoughts on it.

[redwulfe]

Also, Eric said that he wants OpenD6.com to work in a way that might not jibe with this STL. Someone could go onto that site, select a bunch of game rules, not add anything new, and then not be able to use this STL. Since Eric owns the trademarks, that wouldn't be a problem, but it would force him to either not allow anyone to do that, or he would have to create a new STL specifically allowing that. Two STLs are probably more than a system needs.

I think you are referring to one of two main situations.
1. Say someone wishes to produce a setting they write all of the material for that setting but it has no game rules. They then go to OpenD6.com and create a set of rules to put in there book and try to publish it. since they added no new content to there setting to release as OGL content they could not use the STL.

In this case I think they just need to add races, templates, and new disadvantages and such to be given to the OGL community for further use in Open D6. I don't think 5% would be that hard to come up with in the overall work. in a 200 page work that only means 10 pages worth of material. I don't think this would be that hard. Most people will create about 140 pages and that only means 7 pages need to be OGL. This is not including if you took out all of the illustrations to get a true page count without all the layout and graphics.

2. Someone goes to OpenD6.com creates there own version of the rules and publishes it with no modifications. Like mongooses pocket players handbook and such. I think that this is not what being apart of the Open community is all about and though this clause stops this sort of behavior, I think that is a good thing.

Red

[harmyn]

I think you are referring to one of two main situations.
1. Say someone wishes to produce a setting they write all of the material for that setting but it has no game rules. They then go to OpenD6.com and create a set of rules to put in there book and try to publish it. since they added no new content to there setting to release as OGL content they could not use the STL.

In this case I think they just need to add races, templates, and new disadvantages and such to be given to the OGL community for further use in Open D6. I don't think 5% would be that hard to come up with in the overall work. in a 200 page work that only means 10 pages worth of material. I don't think this would be that hard. Most people will create about 140 pages and that only means 7 pages need to be OGL. This is not including if you took out all of the illustrations to get a true page count without all the layout and graphics.

2. Someone goes to OpenD6.com creates there own version of the rules and publishes it with no modifications. Like mongooses pocket players handbook and such. I think that this is not what being apart of the Open community is all about and though this clause stops this sort of behavior, I think that is a good thing.

Red

Again though, is it good to require someone to come up with new rules solely to meet the 5% requirement? What if it is an adventure or setting for use with D6? To me, it seems like you should only create and use the rules that are actually needed for a game. And who is going to monitor to make certain that all published materials meet the minimum requirement? That doesn't seem like an easy thing to come up with.

As to the Mongoose pocket players books, I didn't buy one, but was there a big outrage on it? And if someone comes out with a Pocket D6 Core Companion is that a horrible thing? If people want it they will buy it and it will show there was a demand for it. If people don't want it then they won't buy it and then the resizing, reflowing of text, and modified layout was a lot of work for no real purpose by the person publishing it. I agree it added nothing new, but why is that bad.

Also, if a fan goes to the site, picks out all the rules and resources to print a 30's Pulp Adventure using just the stuff there and then go to Lulu to print it out. They can't note it with the D6 logo despite the fact their little book was created using OGL D6 material. If someone sees the book and wonders what system it is, it will not have the logo on it because the fanmade book based off OGL material does not meet the minimum requirements put into the STL.

I guess my big concern is ultimately, every additional restriction that is added above and beyond what Eric is asking for is one more barrier a fan or company has to overcome to producing material for D6 and potentially reduces the number of books that can be out there. I doubt there is going to be a big glut of stuff like there was in the beginning for D20 and so why create additional limitations.

[Infinite Possibilities]

I think you are referring to one of two main situations.
1. Say someone wishes to produce a setting they write all of the material for that setting but it has no game rules. They then go to OpenD6.com and create a set of rules to put in there book and try to publish it. since they added no new content to there setting to release as OGL content they could not use the STL.

In this case I think they just need to add races, templates, and new disadvantages and such to be given to the OGL community for further use in Open D6. I don't think 5% would be that hard to come up with in the overall work. in a 200 page work that only means 10 pages worth of material. I don't think this would be that hard. Most people will create about 140 pages and that only means 7 pages need to be OGL. This is not including if you took out all of the illustrations to get a true page count without all the layout and graphics.

My biggest concern is that they don't bother to do it because the STL restrictions and then the community is left without a cool setting. The requirements are more a restricion when what we really want for the community is wider adaptation of the D6 system. Who cares if they add more to the Open material? As long as they choose to use D6 for there game engine.

Second, who enforces it? If WEG is down because Eric is doing a billion other things and doesn't have time for it at the moment, then having a part of the license that people feel they can ignore because there is no one at the helm to enforce it, just means that they would be willing to ignore other parts of the license as well.


2. Someone goes to OpenD6.com creates there own version of the rules and publishes it with no modifications. Like mongooses pocket players handbook and such. I think that this is not what being apart of the Open community is all about and though this clause stops this sort of behavior, I think that is a good thing.

And I think it is a bad thing. One of the things that the license should do is encourage the spread of the system, not the restriction of it.

Darren

[Infinite Possibilities]

I'm not entirely sure that I follow your reasoning here. If a person generates a new set of game rules from the official OpenD6 site they are doing so with the consent of the owner of the IP. This means that they are free to use this material in any way that the owner of the IP permits - and this may include reproduction and redistribution. The STL only comes into force if all of the material is OGC and you want to use it to create a derivative work based upon that OGC.

Actually the STL comes into effect anytime you want to put the OpenD6 logo on your work. If I create a work based off of all the stuff in the site, I can't put on the OpenD6 logo because there is nothing new in the book. Which is a shame because not being able to put on the OpenD6 logo on a D6 book derived from the OpenD6 site, I think will hurt the community more than help.

Darren

[redwulfe]

Very valid points, if the setting is cool it does add to the community as a whole and this is not a bad thing. As far as reprinting someone else's work, i.e. OpenD6, I am on the fence still. On the one hand I would love to see a pocket version of the rules come out as I don't buy books in full sized format I buy them as PDF or as the smaller trade format or not at all, usually. Then again I feel that anyone that wishes to be a part of the community should wish to add stuff to it, but as I think about it more I don't think it is right that we regulate that. It should be something they wish to do on there own. Settings do add content and it is also full of IP that the company should have the right to protect.

In short I'm convinced.

Red

[Whill]

Did Eric want this stuff about % requirements of new material added to open content? Not only is that impossible to accurately measure, I don't remember Eric having that requirement.


As I has said about a million effing times. The only requirement for the OpenD6 STL will be that newly created, non-IP material be sent to OpenD6 (or me in the interim, via email) for archiving and player access. That's it.

To impatient and unwilling to realize that my schedule is 100% full of other stuff right now, go away and draft an STL and send it to me.


Let's not forget a standards of decency clause, per reasonable society, yadda yadda, as well as any material that, with publication, could cause direct and serious harm to the value of the OpenD6 brand.

What I remember is that new creations using the Open D6 material have to be posted to OpenD6.com, and Eric wanted a decency clause in there. That's it. I think some of you are going way overboard with this. Eric said he didn't have time to do it, so would consider a submission to him for approval. This does not mean to add your own imput above and beyond what Eric wanted. You are not tasked to make your own judgements about what you feel should be in there. If you want to help Eric, then just put what Eric wants in there, and if he wants more he will tell you.

He wanted it to be "open", not to have a lot of restictions.

[Prime Evil]

Did Eric want this stuff about % requirements of new material added to open content? Not only is that impossible to accurately measure, I don't remember Eric having that requirement.

What I remember is that new creations using the Open D6 material have to be posted to OpenD6.com, and Eric wanted a decency clause in there. That's it. I think some of you are going way overboard with this. Eric said he didn't have time to do it, so would consider a submission to him for approval. This does not mean to add your own imput above and beyond what Eric wanted. You are not tasked to make your own judgements about what you feel should be in there. If you want to help Eric, then just put what Eric wants in there, and if he wants more he will tell you.

He wanted it to be "open", not to have a lot of restictions.

I understand where you are coming from. The problem is that this is a legally-binding contract and the devil is in the detail.

For example, Eric states:


The only requirement for the OpenD6 STL will be that newly created, non-IP material be sent to OpenD6 (or me in the interim, via email) for archiving and player access. That's it.

But what does that mean from a contractual perspective?

Does this mean that you are required to submit all of your work to OpenD6 unless it uses licensed IP?

Who owns content once it is submitted to OpenD6 - Eric or the author?

Does everything produced under the OpenD6 STL become OGC by default so that it can be posted to OpenD6?

Are you permitted to declare any of your work as Product Identity? Or are you required to release everything (including setting-related material, adventures, trade dress, artwork, etc) to OpenD6? On the face of it, Eric's statement seems to imply the latter view (with the exception of "non-IP material" whatever is meant by that statement)

Do you retain any legal rights over derivative works that you create under the OpenD6 license or do you waive them in Eric's favor by using the license?

At the other extreme, can you use define all of your derivative work as Product Identity and refuse to release anything for inclusion in OpenD6?

The draft license is an attempt to blalance Eric's requirements against the rights of authors to retain some degree of ownership and control over the derivative IP that you create using it. The draft requires you to release all game mechanics and related text to OpenD6 while reserving ownership of setting-related content.

[Jamfke]

Actually, Eric's statement reads fairly plainly to me, but I can understand your desire to make everything hash out legally, and I applaud your effort. Obviously, a statement made on a public forum does not hold any legal validity. The wording of a document such as this should be tight enough to ensure that Eric/WEG does not lose control of their intellectual property, and prevent any other publisher from losing anything either.

In the end, the final document should be reviewed thoroughly by an actual attorney who is familiar with IP law to make certain that it will hold up in any court case that may (likely never) arise.

[Cryonic]

Frankly, If I was Forced to open parts of my setting to satisfy some arbitrary ruling, then I'd change game systems. I could just as easily go with Savage Worlds and not have that kind of hassle with my own creations.

[Jamfke]

I don't like the idea of having to open up anything as a requirement myself. As mentioned previously, if you have taken just the OGL rules, and added nothing but setting and fluff, then you either have to leave off claiming compatibility, or "make up" something. I really don't like that idea at all. What would be good is if it was listed as an optional requirement, or some such.

[Prime Evil]

In the end, the final document should be reviewed thoroughly by an actual attorney who is familiar with IP law to make certain that it will hold up in any court case that may (likely never) arise.


I agree with this 100%

[Prime Evil]

I don't like the idea of having to open up anything as a requirement myself. As mentioned previously, if you have taken just the OGL rules, and added nothing but setting and fluff, then you either have to leave off claiming compatibility, or "make up" something. I really don't like that idea at all. What would be good is if it was listed as an optional requirement, or some such.

The problem is that Eric has indicated that every OpenD6 product must contribute to the OpenD6 website and that material posted on the OpenD6 site will be OGC. This means that in order to use the OpenD6 trademark, you need to open up at least something in your work as OGC and offer it to Eric for inclusion on the OpenD6 site.

Given these requirements, the question is what proportion of your work must be opened up as OGC and what proportion can you declare as Product Identity. I suggest that all rules-related material (including everything from NPC statblocks to new game mechanics) must be declared as OGC, but you are permitted to reserve all setting-related material as Product Identity. Basically, Eric gets rights to reproduce the crunch and you retain exclusive control over the fluff.

I think it's important to clarify this point partly so that Eric gets what he needs (content for the OpenD6 website) and you retain some control over your original IP (by declaring it as Product Identity). The last thing we want is for Eric to feel that people are witholding content from the OpenD6 site.

[Prime Evil]

Frankly, If I was Forced to open parts of my setting to satisfy some arbitrary ruling, then I'd change game systems. I could just as easily go with Savage Worlds and not have that kind of hassle with my own creations.


I'm not suggesting that you should be forced to open parts of your setting. In fact, I am suggesting that you can declare all setting-related material as Product Identity. However, the proposed STL would require you to open up the stats of all NPCs and any new rules elements that you create as OGC.

If you decided to go with Savage Worlds, you need a private license between yourself and the owner of the IP because that game system has not been released under the OGL. In that case, the distinction between Open Game Content and Product Identity is not relevant. The requirement to spell out this kind of stuff only applies because the D6 system has been released under the OGL

[Prime Evil]

I feel that I should point out that the draft STL that I posted was designed to provoke a discussion about what the final license should contain – it’s not written in stone and it’s definitely not the final word on the subject. I tend to think of it as a starting point that will hopefully evolve into something everybody can live with. I felt that it was a good idea to put something concrete on the table in order to provoke discussion and debate. I apologize if that was out of line - I honestly didn't expect people to be offended by it.

Speaking personally, I believe that the STL should clearly define the rights and responsibilities of both parties. In addition to spelling out what you need to do in order to use the OpenD6 trademark, it should also spell out exactly what Eric can expect from you. The last thing that anybody wants is a dispute about what you are obliged to contribute to the OpenD6 site.

In my opinion, here are the key points that the STL needs to cover:


By using the OpenD6 trademarks, you agree to contribute some original material to the OpenD6 site.The exact amount of material that you are required to contribute should be clearly spelled out. I suggest that a contribution of 1% of the final product by word count is a reasonable minimum contribution, but people are free to suggest alternatives.
All material contributed to the OpenD6 site must be released as Open Game Content.
Any new game mechanics or rules elements that you create must be included in the content contributed to the OpenD6 site – you can’t hold back material in order to ‘cripple’ the OGC that you contribute to OpenD6 site in such a way that nobody else can use it (Don’t laugh – this kind of thing was common practice for a number of unscrupulous companies during the d20 boom).
You are free to declare anything else in your derivative works as Product Identity, which means that Eric has no right to assume that you will contribute absolutely everything to OpenD6.
Anything that you release under the STL must bear the OpenD6 logo. You can’t hide or alter the logo.
You must include a disclaimer indicating that the OpenD6 trademark belongs to Eric and is used with permission. In addition, you must state that he doesn’t endorse your work in any way.
If you screw up and end up in legal trouble because of something you publish under the STL, you’re on your own – you can’t sue Eric for damages. For example, if you publish a new d6 Star Wars rulebook under the STL and Lucasfilm takes you to court, you can’t blame Eric for your actions and Lucasfilm can’t hold him liable for punitive damages.


I would suggest that anybody interested in contributing to this discussion should take the time to carefully read over the trademark licenses released by other RPG companies releasing material under the OGL. Here are a few relevant links:


Official Open Game License FAQ: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/oglfaq/20040123f
d20 System Trademark License (Version 3): http://onlamp.com/onlamp/2004/11/04/examples/d20trademark_license.rtf
d20 System Trademark License FAQ: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/srdfaq/20040123a
4e Game System License: http://www.wizards.com/d20/files/4E_GSL.pdf
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Compatibility License: http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/compatibility
Pathfinder Compatibility License FAQ: http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/compatibility/faq
Paizo Publishing Community Use Policy http://paizo.com/communityuse
Paizo Community Use Policy FAQ: http://paizo.com/communityuse/faq
Mongoose Traveller Logo License (inside the Developer's Kit): http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/pdf/travdevpack.zip
Action System Trademark License http://www.action-system.com/astl.html

[jasonga]

By using the OpenD6 trademarks, you agree to contribute some original material to the OpenD6 site.The exact amount of material that you are required to contribute should be clearly spelled out. I suggest that a contribution of 1% of the final product by word count is a reasonable minimum contribution, but people are free to suggest alternatives.
I'd ask why? You already cover in your list that any new mechanics or rules elements created should be OGL (and hence can be included in OpenD6) - if the person doesn't create any new rules (but just uses a set of rules as-is from OpenD6), why should they still have to contribute material? They are still promoting OpenD6 by including the logo, which is the main point of the logo.

[Rosencrantz]

I agree, Jasonga. A requirement to submit new rules to the OpenD6 website doesn't seem too heavy a burden on publishers, but a requirement to create new OGC just for the sake of having something to submit seems too restrictive to me.

Yeah in any case I can think of off the top of my head, it might not be difficult to create some new OGC, but that's the problem. I'm not confident that I can predict every use of the system.

[Prime Evil]

I'd ask why? You already cover in your list that any new mechanics or rules elements created should be OGL (and hence can be included in OpenD6) - if the person doesn't create any new rules (but just uses a set of rules as-is from OpenD6), why should they still have to contribute material? They are still promoting OpenD6 by including the logo, which is the main point of the logo.


I suppose the question is whether Eric is happy with products that don't contribute anything to the OpenD6 site. If the answer is yes, then the idea of a mandatory minimum contribution isn't required. If the answer is no, it probably is required.

Also, keep in mind that things such as statblocks count as "new mechanics or rules elements" - everytime you create an NPC, you are generating content that may be counted as part of your contribution.

[Infinite Possibilities]

The problem is that Eric has indicated that every OpenD6 product must contribute to the OpenD6 website and that material posted on the OpenD6 site will be OGC. This means that in order to use the OpenD6 trademark, you need to open up at least something in your work as OGC and offer it to Eric for inclusion on the OpenD6 site.


The only requirement for the OpenD6 STL will be that newly created, non-IP material be sent to OpenD6 (or me in the interim, via email) for archiving and player access. That's it.

See, when I read the quote from Eric, I don't read into it that every product has to have new OGC. Only that IF there is new material derived from OGL material, that it has to be added to the website.

Another thing to consider is what happened with D20. There were a lot of products released that would release the stat block as OGL, but make the name or title of the stat block PI. Which, in effect, made the stat block completely worthless from a re-usability point of view.

So I think it becomes a matter of quality. Do we really want a ton of nameless stat blocks clogging up the website because the STL required that each product has new content?

Also, what happens when the product no longer needs new OGL to be produced? If you have already made the setting, you have already made all the places and all the people in your setting, and you are just using the same people and places to create your adventure, like in a series, and you have nothing new to add. Do we really want to prevent the publisher from using the Logo?

More importantly, any book that is produced from the website itself will only use existing OGL material. Do we really think it is wise to deny the use of the logo from books produced from the website because there is no new material in it?

Darren

[Prime Evil]

I agree, Jasonga. A requirement to submit new rules to the OpenD6 website doesn't seem too heavy a burden on publishers, but a requirement to create new OGC just for the sake of having something to submit seems too restrictive to me.

Yeah in any case I can think of off the top of my head, it might not be difficult to create some new OGC, but that's the problem. I'm not confident that I can predict every use of the system.

Fair enough. I suppose it depends upon whether Eric wants people to submit something from every work published under the OpenD6 license or whether he is happy to accept that some works might not contribute anything new.

Based upon the feedback so far, it seems that most people are happy with the idea that all new rules and game mechanics must be declared as OGC, but many people are not happy with the idea that publishers must release some material from every work as OGC. Is this an accurate summary of the current consensus?

[Infinite Possibilities]

I feel that I should point out that the draft STL that I posted was designed to provoke a discussion about what the final license should contain – it’s not written in stone and it’s definitely not the final word on the subject. I tend to think of it as a starting point that will hopefully evolve into something everybody can live with. I felt that it was a good idea to put something concrete on the table in order to provoke discussion and debate. I apologize if that was out of line - I honestly didn't expect people to be offended by it.

What you have done here is awsome. You are not out of line and I haven't interpreted any of the replies as being offended, just the descussion you were after. ;-)


In my opinion, here are the key points that the STL needs to cover:


By using the OpenD6 trademarks, you agree to contribute some original material to the OpenD6 site.The exact amount of material that you are required to contribute should be clearly spelled out. I suggest that a contribution of 1% of the final product by word count is a reasonable minimum contribution, but people are free to suggest alternatives.


Heh, you already know were I stand on this one. ;-)




All material contributed to the OpenD6 site must be released as Open Game Content.
Any new game mechanics or rules elements that you create must be included in the content contributed to the OpenD6 site – you can’t hold back material in order to ‘cripple’ the OGC that you contribute to OpenD6 site in such a way that nobody else can use it (Don’t laugh – this kind of thing was common practice for a number of unscrupulous companies during the d20 boom).
You are free to declare anything else in your derivative works as Product Identity, which means that Eric has no right to assume that you will contribute absolutely everything to OpenD6.
Anything that you release under the STL must bear the OpenD6 logo. You can’t hide or alter the logo.
You must include a disclaimer indicating that the OpenD6 trademark belongs to Eric and is used with permission. In addition, you must state that he doesn’t endorse your work in any way.
If you screw up and end up in legal trouble because of something you publish under the STL, you’re on your own – you can’t sue Eric for damages. For example, if you publish a new d6 Star Wars rulebook under the STL and Lucasfilm takes you to court, you can’t blame Eric for your actions and Lucasfilm can’t hold him liable for punitive damages.


All of these I completely agree with.

Darren

[jasonga]

Based upon the feedback so far, it seems that most people are happy with the idea that all new rules and game mechanics must be declared as OGC, but many people are not happy with the idea that publishers must release some material from every work as OGC. Is this an accurate summary of the current consensus?
I don't think that I'd characterise us as "unhappy" - just pointing out that there are vaild cases where there wouldn't be any new OGC (or at least OGC of any worth, eg: NPC stat blocks)

[Infinite Possibilities]

Based upon the feedback so far, it seems that most people are happy with the idea that all new rules and game mechanics must be declared as OGC, but many people are not happy with the idea that publishers must release some material from every work as OGC. Is this an accurate summary of the current consensus?

At least the people that have posted so far. You can always start a poll, try out the new V4 polls see how they roll. ;-)

Darren

[Whill]

I suppose the question is whether Eric is happy with products that don't contribute anything to the OpenD6 site. If the answer is yes, then the idea of a mandatory minimum contribution isn't required.

You should assume he's ok with it unless he specifies otherwise. I've been here since the beginning, and I don't remember Eric ever describing that any new content would be required of anyone. So someone could use the core rules as is, or someone else's contributions without any new mechanics or contributions to the OGC, and publish his own setting with complete game rules. IF you create new game mechanics, then they have to be submitted to OpenD6.com. IF.

My point in my previous post was, don't even raise questions about requirements that would not absolutely be necessary of a document of this nature. Make your proposition based only on Eric's requirements and any legal requirements. Optional things should not even be added into the mix unless Eric specifically states they should. Don't speculate on what options he might want, no matter how much of an expert you are on the matter. After all, Eric made it "effing" clear what he wanted. :cool:

[Rosencrantz]

Hear, hear!

The tone of this discussion has been productive without being combative. I'm glad for it.

[Prime Evil]

Well...I think we're getting close to a draft that we can put to Eric.

I'll remove the requirement for all products to contribute new OGC, but keep the requirement that all rules and game mechanics must be OGC and must be submitted to the OpenD6 site.

I agree that Eric seems to have distanced himself from the community at the moment (to put it mildly) and I think that it it's important to ensure that we retain the right to declare some material ('fluff') in OpenD6 publications as Product Identity. Does anybody disagree with this idea?

(Sorry...I'm at work and posting on the run)

[Whill]

Yeah, you can declare all of your original setting material ("fluff") as your own PI. I agree any new game mechanics should be OGC. That's been the spirit of Open D6 from the beginning.

[Jamfke]

What if some of your mechanics are what makes your product unique? You're basically turning the whole percentage idea on its head, and saying that you must submit all mechanics you create as open content. That's more restrictive than just a percentage, and something that I believe no publisher would want to comply with.

[jasonga]

I think that it it's important to ensure that we retain the right to declare some material ('fluff') in OpenD6 publications as Product Identity. Does anybody disagree with this idea?
Frankly, if the STL tries to limit what I can call closed content or PI I won't be using it.

[Rosencrantz]

That's a good point. It would be a clause that might stifle the wider community. I think that Eric should be the one to make this call, it's his license.

I think that the fewer restrictions that Eric is willing to accept, the better it is for the community. Markets have a way of sorting themselves out.

[Prime Evil]

What if some of your mechanics are what makes your product unique? You're basically turning the whole percentage idea on its head, and saying that you must submit all mechanics you create as open content. That's more restrictive than just a percentage, and something that I believe no publisher would want to comply with.

Under the proposed draft, you would be required to release those mechanics to the community in order to strengthen the OpenD6 brand as a whole.

Eric has made it clear that his main requirement for the STL is for publishers to submit some material from each product that they produce to the OpenD6 site. He has also indicated that this material will be made available as OGC.

If each product published under the OpenD6 STL must contain some OGC, the question is how do we specify a level of contribution that will keep Eric happy? You've indicated that you a percentage based approach is not something that you are comfortable with. And you feel that designating all game mechanics and rules elements as OGC is even worse. So what would you propose as an alternative?

Part of the problem is that Eric has never specified exactly what he expects except in fairly broad terms. He says that he wants people to provide content to OpenD6 but doesn't indicate any details beyond "newly created, non-IP material". Does this mean all newly created material that doesn't use third-party IP? Does it mean anything that you don't explicitly declare as IP? Does it mean all new material that isn't Product Identity?

Ultimately, the only person who can answer this question is Eric. And he has indicated that he is unable to produce an STL that addresses the issue at the moment because of other commitments in his life. Which means that the best course of action available to us is to prepare a draft STL and ask basically him "is this what you intended?"

It's not an ideal situation by any stretch of the imagination. Ideally, Eric would be the one drafting the STL in consultation with third-party publishers who intend to release OpenD6 products. But this isn't going to happen anytime soon. If we want an STL in the near future, we need to do the work. And that means that we have to confront these problem of defining what is a reasonable level of contribution to the OpenD6 site ourselves. To be frank, I don't think that Eric will grant people permission to use his trademarks without getting something in return - and what he wants is OGC material for the future OpenD6 site.

As an aside, I disagree that no publisher would agree to open the game mechanics as OGC but retain control of the setting-related material as PI. A number of very successful RPG companies do exactly that. Look at the OGC and PI declarations in works by publishers such as Paizo, Green Ronin, AEG, Crafty Games, LPJ Designs, and you will find that many of their works are released under this kind of arrangement.

[Prime Evil]

Frankly, if the STL tries to limit what I can call closed content or PI I won't be using it.

I understand your concern and am very open to alternatives.

So how would you modify the draft STL to guarantee that Eric gets OGC material for the OpenD6 site from products published using his trademarks without limiting what you can declare as Product Identity?

[Prime Evil]

That's a good point. It would be a clause that might stifle the wider community. I think that Eric should be the one to make this call, it's his license.

I think that the fewer restrictions that Eric is willing to accept, the better it is for the community. Markets have a way of sorting themselves out.

This is definitely a call for Eric. However, he has basically indicated that he can't make the call at the moment for various reasons and has asked the community to put forward a proposal for his consideration. I suspect that the only way we are going to get a clear answer out of him is by putting something concrete on the table.

I agree that we need a draft that has broad community support, which is why I think it's worth taking the time to discuss these issues. I'd be interested to know what established publishers such as Comstar think would be reasonable for the STL.

Keeping restrictions to a minimum is a good idea - the problem is that we don't know where Eric's comfort level lies and what he is willing to accept.

[Rosencrantz]

Maybe we should start off with the least restrictive proposal first, then if Eric isn't comfortable, offer a slightly more restrictive model.

[Prime Evil]

Maybe we should start off with the least restrictive proposal first, then if Eric isn't comfortable, offer a slightly more restrictive model.

Fair enough.

So what would you suggest as the least restrictive proposal?

Incidentally, it seems that most of the concerns are around the issue of OGC / PI.

Is the rest of the draft STL OK?

Does anybody have any issues with the other sections?

[Rosencrantz]

I'd take out the part about declaring all new rules Open Game Content.
I'd leave out any stipulations about how much of a product is Open Game Content.
I'd leave out the part about some Open Game Content must be new.

If I've missed something important, please let me know.

I'd leave in the ethical standards part (Eric has said he wants that.)
I'd leave in the part about submitting all Open Game Content to OpenD6.com / email address (We know Eric wants that, too.)

[Rosencrantz]

Oh, I might have missed it, but in part the proposal calls for all products to be made using the most recent version of the STL. I think that's fine, it just needs an official rule about how to find out what the most current revision is. For instance it could state something like:

"The most recent version of this license can be found at http://www.opend6.com/d6stl/ In the event that that site is unreachable, the version hosted at example2.com/d6stl/ will be considered most recent."

I may have overlooked it, something like that might be in there already.

I won't be back to the forum until very late, Friday or Saturday night, everybody. Have a great Friday!

[Prime Evil]

I won't be back to the forum until very late, Friday or Saturday night, everybody. Have a great Friday!

No problems! Thanks for the contribution!

[jasonga]

I pretty much agree with what Rosencrantz said - I have no problem with the STL saying anything OGC in my products have to be sent to the OpenD6 site. I don't want the STL to say I have to make particular things OGC.

In general most publishers who created d20 products made their rules sections OGC - I believe it would be the same with d6 publishers (especially since we seem to be a tighter community... at least at this stage :-) ), and feel it would be counter-product to try and "force" anything.

Of course, the final call lies with Eric, and what his feelings are on the issue.

[redwulfe]

I was firmly in the camp of making things OGC to add to the overall community, until I thought about, and was shown, what that meant for some publishers, maybe Eric is in the same altruistic mindset. My suggestion is we finish the draft with what we feel is acceptable and submit it to him to see what he thinks.

One idea for the OGC problem is that: 5% of all new system mechanics created by the licensee must be declared as OGC and submitted to OpenD6 for further use by other licensees. This way a person can publish a pure setting and not have to contribute or they can just print the SRD and not have to contribute. They can also keep certain mechanics that make their game unique and just contribute the mechanics that they wish to release. We get new contributions and the system grows but not at the cost of people just creating settings.

Red

[Prime Evil]

I pretty much agree with what Rosencrantz said - I have no problem with the STL saying anything OGC in my products have to be sent to the OpenD6 site. I don't want the STL to say I have to make particular things OGC.

Cool. That's a useful distinction. How about I knock up a new version of the draft STL that takes this approach so that we can review it?


In general most publishers who created d20 products made their rules sections OGC - I believe it would be the same with d6 publishers (especially since we seem to be a tighter community... at least at this stage :-) ), and feel it would be counter-product to try and "force" anything.]Of course, the final call lies with Eric, and what his feelings are on the issue.

I agree that the D6 community is a tighter group at this point - partly because it is smaller and partly because it is filled with people who have kept the faith with a game system that has seen only a few significant releases in the past decade. I agree that the final call lies with Eric. However, I also think that it may be useful to be able to demonstrate the community consensus on the kind of terms and conditions that might appear in an STL. Never forget that Eric needs people to jump on the OpenD6 bandwagon so that he's got a market for future products. It would be a bad move for him to alienate the people whose support he needs to make the OpenD6 successful as a business venture.

[Infinite Possibilities]

I'd take out the part about declaring all new rules Open Game Content.

I think requiring all new rules to be open is reasonable. For one thing, if you are creating new rules, derived from the OGL material, then it only seems fair to release them under the OGL. Also, just because the new rules are marked as PI doesn't mean they are protected, only how you have presented them is protected. If someone really likes the rules and wants to use them, all they have to do is re-wite them from scratch, in there own way and they can still use them. So trying to protect your rules is pretty pointless. Might as well just open them up in the first place.

Darren

[Prime Evil]

I was firmly in the camp of making things OGC to add to the overall community, until I thought about, and was shown, what that meant for some publishers, maybe Eric is in the same altruistic mindset. My suggestion is we finish the draft with what we feel is acceptable and submit it to him to see what he thinks.

This seems like a sensible approach to me. I suspect that we will have a working draft that we can submit to Eric for consideration in the next day or so. We're getting close to the point where we need some feedback from him to finalize the draft.


One idea for the OGC problem is that: 5% of all new system mechanics created by the licensee must be declared as OGC and submitted to OpenD6 for further use by other licensees. This way a person can publish a pure setting and not have to contribute or they can just print the SRD and not have to contribute. They can also keep certain mechanics that make their game unique and just contribute the mechanics that they wish to release. We get new contributions and the system grows but not at the cost of people just creating settings.

Red

This is an interesting idea and might be a workable compromise between the views expressed so far. What do other people think?

An alternative might be to place a statement in the preamble that encouraging publishers to contribute towards building the OpenD6 community by being generous in their declarations of OGC. This would signal the spirit of the STL without placing any contractual restrictions on people with regard to the balance between OGC and PI.

[Infinite Possibilities]

An alternative might be to place a statement in the preamble that encouraging publishers to contribute towards building the OpenD6 community by being generous in their declarations of OGC. This would signal the spirit of the STL without placing any contractual restrictions on people with regard to the balance between OGC and PI.

I'm not a fan of %'s, how do you enforce something like that? But I do like this. Put in something that says, this is what the D6 logo is, this is what we are trying to accomplish, lets build the community together.

Darren

[Jamfke]

I like redwulfe's proposition, but how about wording it as "a minimum of 1% of all new system mechanics created must be declared as OGC..." A hard 5% would be difficult to judge. A minimum of 1% insures that anything submitted would cover the "cost" of using the license, and wouldn't ruffle any feathers.

[Cryonic]

Why not something like

http://www.peginc.com/Licensing.html

[Jamfke]

Are you talking about having a "fan" license, and a commercial one? I'd thought about this too. I'd looked at this one a few weeks ago. Green Ronin's True20 license is a good one too.

[Cryonic]

Are you talking about having a "fan" license, and a commercial one? I'd thought about this too. I'd looked at this one a few weeks ago. Green Ronin's True20 license is a good one too.

I was also referring to how plain and simple it was to understand. It is almost exactly what Eric would need for D6 with just the addition that material that isn't PI should be submitted to OpenD6 and it has an extra clause in the commercial version about submitting works for approval of the license (which helps with the decency and quality standards). Once you are licensed you don't have to submit future works.

[nairobie]

I think requiring all new rules to be open is reasonable. For one thing, if you are creating new rules, derived from the OGL material, then it only seems fair to release them under the OGL. Also, just because the new rules are marked as PI doesn't mean they are protected, only how you have presented them is protected. If someone really likes the rules and wants to use them, all they have to do is re-wite them from scratch, in there own way and they can still use them. So trying to protect your rules is pretty pointless. Might as well just open them up in the first place.

Darren

that really depends on how you define reasonable, one could see it as ones work is forced to be opened up, which again isnt really promoting the use of it. saying that everything that is open should be uploaded to opend6 is another thing tho, mostly because of the choice. and as you say if i dont like the restrictions i could just as easily just rewrite the whole system from scratch and word it differently and the legal stuff that would follow would go in my favor. so using that logic the rule itself is "pointless". i also believe that based on how close this community is, and my prediction(unfortunately), that it wont "explode" in the close surrounding years, that well most things that will be off use to the community itself will be submitted and whats left kept by the individuals.

on a side note im partially for the usage of a percentage, but the fact that it forces those who works on d6 and that its too hard to base i think would lead people to use less limiting and easier to compile to licenses. those who will chose other systems, that might have opened up something but would feel forced to with the percentage rule i think would really make up for an possible small addition rate. been working a "lot" with foss the community approach should work the same here, 99% of the community will suggest and complain(of feedback if you will) and 1% will actually do something(write in this case). without either percentage the other will be useless.

[Prime Evil]

Why not something like

http://www.peginc.com/Licensing.html


The problem is that the Savage Worlds system has never been opened up under the OGL and the license doesn't need to deal with the oddities of that license.

In addition, they don't have to deal with anything like the requirement to submit material to the OpenD6 portal for redistribution.

I've got to admit that the Savage Worlds licensing scheme has been very successful for the Pinnacle Entertainment Group and they have built up an excellent relationship with their licensees.

But that has as much to do with the way that the company has maintained a close working relationship with the Savage World community as the structure of the license itself.

Unfortunately, we have a situation where the licensor (Eric) is disengaged from the d6 community for personal reasons, so I don't think that we are going to see the same sort of close working relationship between the licensor (Eric) and the licensees (us). Which is a real pity.

[Prime Evil]

Are you talking about having a "fan" license, and a commercial one? I'd thought about this too. I'd looked at this one a few weeks ago. Green Ronin's True20 license is a good one too.

I must admit that I've been thinking about a Community Use license similar to the one developed by Paizo. This would allow noncommercial use of the other WEG trademarks (Septimus, Bloodshadows, Torg, Shatterzone, etc) in relation to fan works.

Given the history of WEG, such a 'fan' license would need to be worded carefully - it mustn't give the impression that fans can produce material for expired licenses such as Star Wars, Hercules, Xena, et al. Otherwise Eric could be held liable for anything that fans produce using the Community Use License that infringes on third-party trademarks.

[Jamfke]

Yeah, you might want to confer with Eric over that idea, no need to cause him any more grief than he's already been given.

[Prime Evil]

Yeah, you might want to confer with Eric over that idea, no need to cause him any more grief than he's already been given.

I plan to ask him if he would consider a Community Use License. I don't think that he would object to the idea.

[Prime Evil]

OK....Here's the next draft of the STL based upon the feedback so far:


DRAFT OPEND6 TRADEMARK LICENSE (Version 4.0)

Preamble
This document contains a license to use the trademarks owned by Purgatory Publishing that are associated with the OpenD6 System. It describes the correct use of these trademarks, and defines the rules that you must abide by when using them.

Definitions

Licensed Articles
"Licensed Articles" means any and all of the following trademarks owned by Purgatory Publishing:

The D6 System Trademark logo
The OpenD6 Trademark logo
The trademark D6 System
]The trademark OpenD6 System
West End Games
Purgatory Publishing


Excluded Articles
The following trademarks are explicitly excluded from this license:

The trademark TORG
The trademark Masterbook
The trademark Bloodshadows
The trademark Shatterzone
The trademark Septimus
The trademark Fires of Amatsumara


Authority to Use
You are hereby granted non-transferable, non-sublicensable, non-exclusive, royalty-free license to use the Licensed Articles in printed books, electronic books, and freely available websites in connection with products that are compatible with the OpenD6 Game System, subject to the obligations and limitations set forth in this License. You may also use this license to produce electronic game aids, but not standalone computer games.

You may not use any of the Excluded Articles unless you negotiate a separate licensing agreement with Purgatory Publishing, Inc

No license or permission is granted (either expressly or by implication) with respect to any trademarks, copyrights, or other intellectual property right except the Licensed Articles specified in this document, and any right not specifically granted hereunder is expressly reserved to Purgatory Publishing.

Acceptance of Terms
By using the Licensed Articles, you agree to be bound by the terms and conditions of the license.

Any other use of the licensed marks is strictly prohibited, with the exception of such use as is permitted under the “fair use” provisions of copyright law.

Ownership of Trademarks
Purgatory Publishing represents and warrants that is the owner of the trademarks listed in the Licensed Articles and that to the best of its current knowledge, information, and belief the use of these trademarks does not and shall not infringe upon the intellectual property rights of any person, firm, or corporation.

Purgatory Publishing shall retain the ownership of these trademarks at all times.

Agreement not to Contest
By using any of the Licensed Articles under the terms of this License, you agree not to contest the ownership of the Licensed Articles. In addition, you further agree and accept that the Licensed Marks constitute Product Identity as defined in the Open Game License. This provision of the license shall survive the termination of the license.

Any derivative works that you produce under this license must contain a designation of product identity that includes the following text:

West End Games, WEG, D6 System, OpenD6 and the OpenD6 graphic logo are trademarks of Purgatory Publishing Inc. These trademarks and are used with permission under the terms of the OpenD6 System Trademark License. This product is not endorsed by West End Games or Purgatory Publishing Inc.

Restrictions on Usage
You may not use the trademarks Purgatory Publishing, West End Games or WEG anywhere except in the mandatory legal disclaimers required by this trademark license.

You are not permitted to use the old D6 System Trademark logo. This license only permits use of the newer OpenD6 Logo.

You must not duplicate the trade dress of any official D6 product from West End Games or present any work produced under this license in such a way that a reasonable person might conclude that it is an official D6 product from West End Games.

You may not use the Licensed Articles in a way that suggests or implies that Purgatory Publishing endorses or is in any way responsible for any part of your product, or for any conduct of your business, or that suggests that you have any relationship with Purgatory Publishing or West End Games beyond this license, unless a separate agreement has been negotiated that lets you do so.

You also may not state or suggest that Purgatory Publishing guarantees your product's compatibility with the OpenD6 Roleplaying System.

You must use your best efforts to preserve the high standard of the OpenD6 trademarks. You may not use this License for products that the general public would classify as offensive or inappropriate for minors.

Logo Usage
All works produced under the terms of this license must prominently display the official OpenD6 trademark logo.

In the case of printed materials, the OpenD6 logo must appear the on the cover of the work and should be reproduced at a size appropriate for easy recognition. It may also be used on the spine, back cover, or splash page at the discretion of the publisher.

If this is impossible (e.g. in an ASCII text file) the text “An OpenD6 Licensed Product” may be used instead.

You may use the OpenD6 Logo only to indicate that your product is compatible with the OpenD6 Roleplaying System. The logo may only be used on OpenD6 compatible products and in advertisements and websites directly promoting those products.

You may not alter the color, typography or design of the OpenD6 logo. However, you are permitted convert the OpenD6 logo to greyscale for reproduction in black and white publications.

You are not permitted to stretch or distort the OpenD6 logo, although you are permitted to resize it, provided that the original proportions are retained.

The OpenD6 logo must always be reproduced at a size that is visible and legible.

You are not permitted to cover, obscure, or overprint any portion of the OpenD6 logo.

Mandatory Disclaimer
The following mandatory text must be attached to any work created under the terms of this license:

This product contains derivative material based on the OpenD6 System released under the Open Game License. OpenD6 and the OpenD6 graphic logo are trademarks of Purgatory Publishing Inc. These trademarks and are used with permission under the terms of the OpenD6 System Trademark License. This product is not endorsed by West End Games or Purgatory Publishing, Inc.

The mandatory text must be reproduced in a legible font at a size no smaller than 10 points.

[Prime Evil]

Draft OpenD6 Trademark License (Version 4.0) - Continued

Marketing and Promotion
You may use the Licensed Articles for the purposes of marketing or promoting a work released under the terms and conditions of this license.

All marketing materials that utilize the Licensed Articles must incorporate the following text in a legible font and size:

The OpenD6 System and the OpenD6 System logo are trademarks of Purgatory Publishing and are used with permission.

Compliance with the Open Game License
All works released under the OpenD6 Trademark License must comply with the terms and conditions of the Open Game License.

The Licensed Articles may only be used in connection with materials you publish under the Open Gaming License 1.0a ("OGL").

You may not use the Licensed Articles in any way that the OGL prohibits.

You are solely responsible for ensuring you use the OGL correctly.

The Licensed Articles are designated as Product Identity as that term is defined in the OGL.

You must clearly designate those portions of any work produced under this license that are released as Open Game Content (OGC)

By using the Licensed Articles, you agree to submit all Open Game Content created under the License to OpenD6.com within thirty days after the date of publication or release to the public.

In the event that OpenD6.com is unavailable or non-functional, you may instead submit your Open Game Content to the email address hellsreach@gmail.com. All content submitted to the email address must be submitted as an attached .txt or .rtf file.

This license will automatically terminate if you fail to comply with the terms and conditions of the Open Game License and do not such breach within 30 days of becoming aware of it.

Updates and Revisions
Purgatory Publishing may issue updates and/or revisions of the OpenD6 Trademark License without prior notice.

If this license is updated or revised, the new version shall contain a different version number.

The current version of this license shall be published on OpenD6.com.

You may continue to distribute any pre-existing material under the old version of the license, but no new material may be published using an old version of the license.

New material must comply in all respects with the terms and conditions of the current version of the OpenD6 Trademark License.

Termination for Breach
In the event that you fail to comply with the terms of this License, You will be considered to be in breach of this License.
Purgatory Publishing will attempt to notify you in writing of the breach. If You cannot be contacted, you will be considered to be in breach of this License immediately.

Except as otherwise specified herein, you will have 30 days from the date of the notice (the "cure period") to cure the breach to the satisfaction of Purgatory Publishing, Inc.

If, at the end of the cure period, the breach is not cured, Purgatory Publishing may terminate this License without further written notice to you.

Effects of Termination
Upon termination, you shall immediately stop all use of the Licensed Articles and will destroy any inventory or marketing material in Your possession bearing the OpenD6 System trademark logos.

You will remove any use of the OpenD6 System trademark logos from your advertising, web site, letterhead, or any other use.

You must instruct any company or individual that you are or become aware of who is in possession of any materials distributed by you bearing the OpenD6 System trademark logos to destroy those materials. You will solely bear any costs related to carrying out this term of the License.

At Purgatory Publishing's sole discretion, Purgatory Publishing may allow you to continue to use the License for Licensed Articles which otherwise comply with the terms of the License.
Any existing sublicenses will survive the termination of the OpenD6 Trademark License license.

Penalty for Failure to Comply with Termination Instructions
If you fail to comply with the Effects of Termination, Purgatory Publishing may, at its option, pursue litigation, for which you shall be responsible for all legal costs, against you to the full extent of the law for breach of contract, copyright and trademark infringement, damages and any other remedy available.

Warranties and Limitations of Liability
Purgatory Publishing makes no warranties about the suitability of the Licensed Articles or the OpenD6 System Trademark License for your business.

Purgatory Publishing is not obligated to provide support for your use of the Licensed Articles.

Purgatory Publishing may not be held liable for any damages (incidental, consequential, or otherwise) resulting for your use of the Licensed Articles or your agreeing to this License.

This license constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with respect to all matters herein, and its execution has not been induced by any representations, warranties, or promises whatsoever not incorporated herein.

Indeminification
You agree to defend, indemnify and hold Purgatory Publishing harmless from any claims, demands or suits brought with respect to any products produced by or for you.

[Prime Evil]

As an aside, I'd like to thank everybody for their contribution to this discussion. It has been very useful!

[Jamfke]

This looks good, though I do have a somewhat trivial twitch about logo placement. No problems with the requirement of putting it on the cover of a full game or supplement, but in the case of a magazine, it might look a bit odd. Like I said, it's trivial.

Ya done good!

[Prime Evil]

This looks good, though I do have a somewhat trivial twitch about logo placement. No problems with the requirement of putting it on the cover of a full game or supplement, but in the case of a magazine, it might look a bit odd. Like I said, it's trivial.

Ya done good!

Hmmmm....Maybe we should just specify that it needs to be displayed prominently and leave it at that?

[Jamfke]

Works for me.

[Whill]

I'd take out the part about declaring all new rules Open Game Content.
I'd leave out any stipulations about how much of a product is Open Game Content.
I'd leave out the part about some Open Game Content must be new.

If I've missed something important, please let me know.

I'd leave in the ethical standards part (Eric has said he wants that.)
I'd leave in the part about submitting all Open Game Content to OpenD6.com / email address (We know Eric wants that, too.)

I'm down with this!

I admit I don't really know why anyone would want hold any game mechanics back, but I'm not a game publisher. I'm just a fan and end consumer. In the spirit of OPENess, I plan on contributing a little bit of game mechanics to the world for free, with no commercial intentions. I thought (incorrectly) that potential authors would also be contributing game mechanics to OGC because it's an OPEN system. I thought (incorrectly) that potential authors would only want to protect their original setting material and non-game mechanics fluff. But I guess I'm to understand that some 6D authors feel they have some new game mechanic tricks up their sleeves that will make your game unique and make us want to buy it, so you can't give your game mechanical gimmick away for free. I'm a little saddened to just now realize that there will be game mechanics that people will hold back and say "mine, not open, you pay me for this".

Maybe I thought all game mechanics would be given away for free because I have every D6 game and I think it's all been done. There's not really an infinite number of possiblilities with this system. People talk about this edition and that edition ("D6 Space is really Star Wars 3E", etc.), but it's still really all WEG "Star Wars" when it boils down to it. But whatever, maybe I'll be proven wrong. Maybe someone has some new secret innovation that will vastly improve the D6 system. I doubt it, but if you think you do and want to sell it instead of give it away, more power to you. Good luck with your business idea. I hope your original setting is just as good as your non-open game content and they both make you rich.

I never meant to say that I think all game mechanics must be OGL. That is adding a severe restriction and I don't think Eric wanted that either. I honestly just didn't imagine that anyone would want to hold back on game mechanics. Now I know better. I still feel strongly that Eric didn't mean that anyone had to contribute anything. So there should be no 1% clause. You take want you want from OGC and give whatever you want. Give a penny, take a penny.

I understood the point of making D6 open was to revitalize the system among the game world. Then when a lot of people start using it to make games, the system will sell itself. One D6 game is an advertisement of the next D6 game. WEG and everyone else making D6 games benefit. We all know this system is way better than d20. If D6 starts to become popular, people will forget about open d20 and other open games. Open D6's OGC will grow without having any sort of requirement to contribute OGC if you publish something with it. Trust me!

[Prime Evil]

I understood the point of making D6 open was to revitalize the system among the game world. Then when a lot of people start using it to make games, the system will sell itself. One D6 game is an advertisement of the next D6 game. WEG and everyone else making D6 games benefit. We all know this system is way better than d20. If D6 starts to become popular, people will forget about open d20 and other open games. Open D6's OGC will grow without having any sort of requirement to contribute OGC if you publish something with it. Trust me!

So do you like the revised STL draft, Whill? Does it address your concerns?

[Rosencrantz]

The draft v4 works for me!

I concede that it might be funky for periodicals, but I don't have a solution for that. I like the "must be displayed prominently" if others agree.

[jasonga]

But I guess I'm to understand that some 6D authors feel they have some new game mechanic tricks up their sleeves that will make your game unique and make us want to buy it, so you can't give your game mechanical gimmick away for free. I'm a little saddened to just now realize that there will be game mechanics that people will hold back and say "mine, not open, you pay me for this"
To be honest I would be surprised if any publisher ever would make their mechanics closed content - I doubt I ever would. But I can imagine that a publisher might come up with a different way of doing things, or convert an existing system they've published to D6 terms, and want to protect that. For example, a new magic system or superpowers system that's totally different to the existing systems.

I just dislike the idea (and I imagine others might too) that anything would *require* mechanics to be open. There seems little point in having that, and it would have the potential to just turn away some publishers.

But the current draft has moved away from that, and looks good.

[jasonga]

As an aside, I'd like to thank everybody for their contribution to this discussion. It has been very useful!
Thank you for taking the lead on putting this together. It's looking great, and I can't see anything in there that would worry me as a publisher.

[Rosencrantz]

I move that we forward the v4 Draft STL to Eric.

(A big thanks to Prime Evil for chairing this ad-hoc committee!)

[Infinite Possibilities]

that really depends on how you define reasonable, one could see it as ones work is forced to be opened up, which again isnt really promoting the use of it. saying that everything that is open should be uploaded to opend6 is another thing tho, mostly because of the choice.

Fair enough. And without haveing the requirements in there, then those that do contribute would feel much better about it, which is always a good thing for the community.

Darren

[Jamfke]

I'm sorry, Whill, if you think I'm being such an arse about the whole OGC thing. I don't plan to hold anything back either, but someone who might be thinking of using the system might turn away from it based on certain restrictions of use. I'm just looking at it from a business perspective.

I would also like to add my thanks to your efforts Prime Evil. I hope Eric likes the draft.

[Whill]

Not at all James. I admitted the business perspective is not the frame of mind I was in. I think we're totally on the same page about the lack of restrictions.


So do you like the revised STL draft, Whill? Does it address your concerns?

I'm sleepy and coming down with something. I'm going out of town tomorrow, but I'll read it through carefully sometime later this weekend when I'm hopefully in a better frame of mind. My step-dad's a corporate attorney and I still get a headache whenever I read legalese. Thanks for asking Evil.

[Prime Evil]

It sounds like we've got a consensus.

I'll send the current draft to Eric for feedback - at the very least, this should let us know if he has any requirements that have not yet been disclosed.

If he is happy with the draft, he will probably want to run it past his lawyer before it goes live.

I'll ask him if he is willing to let us use with the current draft as an interim agreement while it is under review.

And I'll ask him about the idea of Community Use Policy permitting noncommercial usage of WEG trademarks such as TORG and Bloodshadows for fan sites.

Obviously, it is Eric who needs to post any official announcements about the STL, but I am cautiously optimistic that we may have an active license soon!

[redwulfe]

Thank you Prime for all your work and effort on this I hope Eric likes it.

Red

[harmyn]

Prime Evil, you have done a great job getting the ball rolling on the discussion and getting the various versions drafted. Your name may be "evil" but you are one heck of a good guy I say. :D

[Prime Evil]

Prime Evil, you have done a great job getting the ball rolling on the discussion and getting the various versions drafted. Your name may be "evil" but you are one heck of a good guy I say. :D

Don't thank me yet...Eric still hasn't agreed to anything. There's still a chance that we might need to start again from scratch.

[Whill]

So do you like the revised STL draft, Whill? Does it address your concerns?
I see you've already submitted it to Eric. Thanks for asking about my concerns anyway, Evil. And thanks for considering everyone's imput in this thread. I guess now we wait.

[hellsreach]

Having fallen behind on this quickly growing thread, I must admit to not reading it in its entirety. That said, I want to make a few comments.

First, a thousand "thank yous" to each of you for the work you've put into getting this document together. It's coming along nicely.

Now, a few notes:

First, the percent of new material requirement is a good idea in theory. Since the entire point of releasing this system into the OGL is to see the material grow and expand, encouraging people to release that new material into the open is important. But, I'm not sure that contractual encouragement is the way to go. It may (IMHO) be enough that you the fans can encourage said publishers to do so. Vote with your dollars. If you think someone is using the OpenD6 trademarks and materials outside of the spirit of the "movement," I strongly suggest NOT buying their material. If however, the help OpenD6 to grow and thrive, and add to the wealth of material available both commercially as well as open for others to use, then buy their stuff. I now that is simplistic, but I think it may work. The problem is, a percent requirement clause might be difficult to police, and may appear draconian.


A couple of notes on the OGL, for whom may not understand 100%. First, the OGL is a license to use material, not a transfer of rights. Second, it is a share-alike license (with and opt-out) -- By using the OGL for a document, the OGL is applied recursively applied to that book entirely, but you may (or rather must) opt-out of this share-alike license, by noting certain material as Product Identity (PI). If material is PI, its copyrights remain "reserved."

Buy submitting material to me/OpenD6.com, you do not transfer any rights. You still own the IP fully. The submission doesn't change anything legally. It's a convenience activity only. It is already open, by nature of use under the OGL, and share-alike nature of the OGL means you've already granted open public license to the material (just as WEG has granted it for the D6 material so far released), sending the material to me, just saves me (or one of the fans) the time of going an getting it ourselves. It has other benefits beyond aiding the lazy -- it shows a publishers commitment to a healthy and growing game community.



-- Oh, for the community use license to Torg, Bloodshadows, etc. -- anything I do in that regard is 100% and wholly separate from the OpenD6 OGL or the OpenD6STL. That said, I probably will not be granting such a license in any official manner, BUT I've always tried to encourage people to use and build fan support material and such. I'm highly unlikely to every oppose anyone's non-commercial use of WEG trademarks, and reasonable, limited freedom to use our copyrighted text for non-commercial purposes. If someone crosses into a red-zone, I'm usually going to address the problem in a friendly fashion.

Why nothing official? Simple. It adds encumbrance to the property. Should it ever go on e market, the new buyer would want to know there are not wacky, irrevocable licenses altering teh commercial value of the property.

[hellsreach]

Oh, and perhaps we should address the periodical matter. Perhaps, any publication containing 25% or less OpenD6 related material, by page count, may be considered exempt from cover placement requirements (word better at your option).

I figure if a magazine or other publication is OVER 25% related to OpenD6 related material, a cover logo would probably be fairly apropos.

[hellsreach]

Never mind my above...

I'm looking over the license. Looks fairly decent. I'm planning to go over it wil a fine tooth comb as soon as able. I've noticed a corrected a couple matters already.

In licensed articles, the D6 System Logo was included, but I removed it. That logo is still reserved (and retired, actually).

I think the OGC passage needs correction. It indicates that all OGC must be indicated as such, but the OGL renders ALL material not specifically noted as PI, as open content.

The copyright notice required was changed from 10pt to 8pt. That is a lot of text to listed at 10pt.

More, later.

[Rosencrantz]

I agree with you, Hellsreach, that the market will correct bad publishing practices. (In regards to giving back to the community.)

25% by page count sounds fair to me for cover logo requirements. In theory, someone could munchkin that, but then they would be losing out on one of the soon-to be best tools of the OpenD6 STL, easy communication to fans about what is contained by use of the logo. So I doubt that the exemption would be abused.

I'm thinking about how to word this, but so far I've got nothing.

[jasonga]

I think the OGC passage needs correction. It indicates that all OGC must be indicated as such, but the OGL renders ALL material not specifically noted as PI, as open content.
Not quite - the publisher has to clearly indlicate what is open content (and by extension, what is closed content). We'll ignore for the moment that some publishers purposely made it unclear what was open and what wasn't in their work... *cough*white wolf*cough*malhavoc*cough*

It's interesting that the OGL doesn't say specifically what happens to content that you don't specifically mark as open/closed/PI.

[Jamfke]

Thanks for responding so promptly to this Eric. We're all looking forward to more news, as soon as you are able.

[Prime Evil]

Thanks for the feedback, Eric. Unfortunately I don't have time to go over your comments right now and work up another draft of the license, but I'll incorporate your ideas ASAP.

One important thing that is missing from the end of the license is a clause indicating which state jurisdiction disputes about the license will be heard in. I couldn't add that because I don't know what your preference is.

[hellsreach]

PA

**added due to message length stupidity**

[hellsreach]

That depends really. Section 1(d) of the OGL indicates that OGC is everything int he document excluding PI. Section 8 says that if distributing OGC, that OGC content should be clearly indicated. You could argue that, when in doubt [due to section 1(d)] material not noted as PI (section 1(e) clearly states that PI must be specified) is automatically OGC.

I personally thing that section 8 is speaking to distributed third party OGC (stuff you didn't create, but are using in your material). I say this because a "distributor" is not origin of given material, but an outside party that takes material from one source, and provides it to another source. Moverover, I think it could be argued that the inclusion of the OGL license in a given book (as required by the OGL itself) satisfies the section 8 requirement of indicating which that the material is OGL (exempting PI which is to be clearly indicated in that license copy).

[Prime Evil]

The OGL is a funny beast sometimes.

[Whill]

Vote with your dollars. If you think someone is using the OpenD6 trademarks and materials outside of the spirit of the "movement," I strongly suggest NOT buying their material. If however, the help OpenD6 to grow and thrive, and add to the wealth of material available both commercially as well as open for others to use, then buy their stuff. I now that is simplistic, but I think it may work. The problem is, a percent requirement clause might be difficult to police, and may appear draconian.

Thank you, Eric. This is much better worded and simpler way to say what I was also feeling. Once I understood the original concept, I've always been completely on board with the spirit of the Open D6 movement as you have described. Vote with my dollars, I will indeed.

As far as all of your other responses, I must say they are completely intelligible to me and perfectly in synch with how I have understood you to describe your vision for this from the very beginning of your public discussion of it. I share your vision and continue to support the spirit of this movement. Thanks!

[Infinite Possibilities]

That depends really. Section 1(d) of the OGL indicates that OGC is everything int he document excluding PI. Section 8 says that if distributing OGC, that OGC content should be clearly indicated. You could argue that, when in doubt [due to section 1(d)] material not noted as PI (section 1(e) clearly states that PI must be specified) is automatically OGC.

I've never quite understood the whole section 1 because like you say, it sounds like it automatically opens specific things up. But this is how it was explained on the list when the OGL was being written.

In order to be Open content, It does have to be declaired as such. In order to be closed content, that also has to be declaired. So, like Jasonga mentioned you can have three different types of content in your work, content that is declaired open, content that is declaired closed and content that is neither. Section 1 aparently is supposed to be just definitions and not something that happens automatically.

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/oglfaq/20040123f answeres some of those questions"

Q: What is "Open Game Content"?

A: Open Game Content is any material that is distributed using the Open Game License clearly identified by the publisher as Open Game Content. Furthermore, any material that is derived from Open Game Content automatically becomes Open Game Content as well.

Q: What is Product Identity?

A: Product Identity is material, otherwise clearly identified as Open Game Content, that is excluded from the License terms that apply to Open Game Content. Product Identity usually includes trademarks and other Intellectual Property (characters, settings, etc.)

Darren

[redwulfe]

Thanks for your clarifications Eric. I like the voting with dollars idea.

Red

[jasonga]

you can have three different types of content in your work, content that is declaired open, content that is declaired closed and content that is neither.
It's funny - until this STL discussion came up I'd never looked closely at the wording of the OGL (I've only released two products with it, that both build on exisiting OGL work), and I'd never realised that the license doesn't actually define "closed" content anywhere. Interesting how the term has had such common use among publishers, when it's not actually named in the OGL :)

[Infinite Possibilities]

Interesting how the term has had such common use among publishers, when it's not actually named in the OGL :)

Heh, I think it came about becasue it is easier than saying product identity. Or maybe because it is the natural phrase that is thought of when you think, not open. ;-)

Darren

[Prime Evil]

Hey Evil, any update on the status of the STL? It's been a couple weeks, just curious. Thanks.

Unfortunately, I haven't had a reply from Eric yet and I've been a busy with real life stuff for a week or so. To tell you the truth, I was planning on flicking another e-mail to Eric this weekend to see how things are going. However, I get the feeling that he is fairly busy at the moment and it may take him a couple of weeks to reply.

I'll be happy if we can sort out the STL in the next month or two. That will give people who want to release stuff a reasonable amount of time to prepare their products for a GenCon release - assuming that they will go to press around June or so.

[Prime Evil]

Ok...there's been no feedback from Eric for a while and I suspect that time commitments have prevented him from making any further comments here.

It looks like discussions around the OpenD6 STL have pretty much stalled for the time being, so I'm going to concentrate on converting the other PDFs to RTF format for the moment.

I'm about halfway through D6 Space Aliens at the moment and hope to post an initial draft here soon.

It's frustrating that the discussion has stalled, but it's kind of out of our hands at the moment...

[Whill]

Hey Evil, any update on the status of the STL? Has Eric approved or denied the proposed STL? It's been a while, just curious. Thanks.

[hellsreach]

Per the Open D6 Revision thread (http://www.wegfansite.com/forum/showthread.php?2354-OpenD6-OGL-Revisions) there, will soon no longer be any need or reason for an STL, and people will have full unrestricted rights to use the Open D6 trademarks under the OGL.