Traveller Developer's Pack

[Zparkz]

As my web Traveller website and forum addresses a whole different version of Traveller I do not intend to change one bit until MTG or MWM tells me otherwise, and even then I may question their decision.

 

[Andrew Boulton]

It's been a very strange two days, reading and re-reading web pages, Word docs, and occasionally deleting artwork, all trying to unpick the Traveller stuff out.

You don't have to do that now (unless you actually *want* to).

You're right, though, the whole thing is a legal nightmare. I doubt if most of it would stand up in court.

 

[rust]

In essence, this is where my concerns go, that in someway, I have lost some kind of control over my stuff, by foolishly perhaps, taking inspiration from Traveller.

I think it depends very much on the country where someone tries to use your
material.

Here in Germany you can never lose your "Urheberrecht" (our legal equi-
valent of "Copyright"), provided what you created has a certain level of crea-
tivity and originality. Whoever wants to use your material has to ask you for
your explicit permission, unless you explicitly declared the material to be pub-
lic domain.

Other countries still have very much different concepts of intellectual proper-
ty, despite all attempts to find some common international rules.

 

[Spinward Scout]

So let me see if I have this right:

I make a Traveller campaign set in the Regina subsector using my CT and MT books (not even using the Mongoose material). I can't post any of it to the web even a synopsis of what went down during the game in a blog if I mention a single thing from the OTU?

Crap. Pure crap. I guess they really wanted new people playing Traveller, because they are going to alienate the only people that have kept this game going all of these years.

 

[rust]

I can't post any of it to the web even a synopsis of what went down during the game in a blog if I mention a single thing from the OTU?

As far as I understood it, of course you can do that. The only restriction
would be that you may not take money for it.

Here is the text of Mongoose's rules:

1. Whether as author, artist or publisher, no money can ever be charged for OTU material. You cannot 'recover costs', you cannot 'accept donations.' If we get even a whiff that money is changing hands, we will have to take action (if you are interested in fruit for your labours, I suggest you submit it to Signs & Portents!).
2. The TLL and, by extension, the Traveller Logo can never be used in conjunction with such material. The logo or its likeness can never appear alongside such material.
3. Current Traveller rules produced with such material must be declared Open Content, and must be indicated as such in a prominent fashion, such as being 'boxed off' or produced in Bold Text. OTU material (any names, places, concepts, etc) that can be related to the OTU in any way can never be made Open. Any attempt to do so, whether intentional or not, will force us to take action. The OGL must be included with such material.
4. We reserve the right to remove or change this policy at any time, at which point any existing material will have to conform to the new rules, if any.
5. All such material must include the following disclaimer;

"This article is of purely unofficial origin, and should in no way be considered official Traveller canon. Traveller is a trademark of Far Future Enterprises, inc, and is used under licence by Mongoose Publishing."

 

[Flynn]

A question then to those more familiar with the OGL: Has fan material such as Stellar Reaches suddenly become other peoples property, if you like, part of the collective commons, a free for all.

If Stellar Reaches is now classified as OGL, does it becomes material anybody can grab and use. Does the owner/writer of Stellar Reaches have less control over their work than they did before, has their "copyright" to what they created on top of the OTU being diminished in some way?

You retain all copyright to your articles in Stellar Reaches. The only material that others can use is what is identified as Open Game Content in the Declaration of Open Game Content for that particular issue. Even then, you still have copyright, but by declaring it Open Game Content, you are giving everyone permission to use your material in their own OGL products, and if they do, then it must be declared Open Game Content there as well. It's still yours, and will remain so for all eternity.

There's a lot of non-OGL material in Stellar Reaches. For that material, it remains copyright of the contributing author, and people may not publish it without violating copyright laws.

Hope This Helps,
Flynn

 

[Spinward Scout]

3. Current Traveller rules produced with such material must be declared Open Content, and must be indicated as such in a prominent fashion, such as being 'boxed off' or produced in Bold Text. OTU material (any names, places, concepts, etc) that can be related to the OTU in any way can never be made Open. Any attempt to do so, whether intentional or not, will force us to take action. The OGL must be included with such material.

This rule is what makes it not ok to post anything on the Internet that has OTU material in it. This would include a blog. Talking about your character made with Mongoose Traveller - Fine as long as the rules part is declared Open Content. Talking about how your character landed on Regina and engaged Dulinor's Marine regiment in BattleDress - Not Fine. This is how I'm reading it. A couple of other posts on this thread from people who contacted Mongoose seem to say the same thing.

It needs to be clarified at minimum. Worst case scenario is that we can't talk about any of this game that's not part of the rules system (i.e. the whole OTU backdrop) - including by posting on this board.

 

[Amra]

I think this issue is getting blown out of proportion. Non-profit fan based stuff is generally just ignored. The reason is that it isn't a threat to the license holder and even promotes the property in an unofficial way.

Look at all the fan stuff on the web, not just game stuff. LotR, Star Wars, Wheel of Time, etc. There is all kinds of stuff out there; fan fiction, encyclopedias, lexicons, etc. The reason the "Powers That Be" don't define technical legal rights to this stuff is that it isn't worth the trouble and by trying to define it they may create loop-holes where someone could try and make a profit off their property. It's the unwritten rule of "no harm, no foul".

The only people that should be concerned over this stuff is third party publishers, people that want to make MONEY. Fans should continue business as usual.

Expecting Mongoose to strictly define fan material in legalize is, in my opinion, a waste of time and if I was Mongoose I wouldn't want to try and go down that road. Just follow the general rules of Don't make money and don't try to say your stuff is official.

If Mongoose, or Miller, decides to become some sort of "Traveller is MINE" Nazi and starts sending out Cease and Desist letters to non-profit fans than just dump the game and find something new (I know I will). I think this is highly unlikely though, Miller and Mongoose WANT Traveller fans (and fan produced stuff), they just don't want people making money off of them without their cut.

 

[Chronus]

It's been a very strange two days, reading and re-reading web pages, Word docs, and occasionally deleting artwork, all trying to unpick the Traveller stuff out.

You don't have to do that now (unless you actually *want* to).

I visited your site, Thunderbolt, and it looks good (my tour was rather limited because I'm on dial-up). But ... does anyone make money on your site via Traveller?

Unfortunately, I suspect you hastily did something you were not, nor ever will be, required to do.

I think this issue is getting blown out of proportion.

I think so to.

The only people that should be concerned over this stuff is third party publishers, people that want to make MONEY. Fans should continue business as usual.

Expecting Mongoose to strictly define fan material in legalize is, in my opinion, a waste of time and if I was Mongoose I wouldn't want to try and go down that road. Just follow the general rules of Don't make money and don't try to say your stuff is official.

Matt addressed my similar concerns/examples on their board within the "Stellar Reaches" thread and your post seems to reflect the same idea I received.

I think some people are getting so wrapped up in the wording that they're failing to see the spirit that's driving all this. MG isn't trying to kill its fan base, their trying to protect their interests (and their 3rd party interests) in making some money (and to preserve canon) while, at the same time, allow fans to freely share their own Traveller ideas and such. I suspect it's really that simple. I can appreciate fans wanting some better wording in the licenses but some of this "the sky is falling!" rhetoric is really quite premature.

 

[Vile]

Amra has the right of it, really. There is a word of difference between legislation and law enforcement. IMO it's unlikely that Mongoose will trawl the web to find fan sites to send warning messages to. Even if they did, there's no way anyone would play the legal expenses of suing you, even if there was a hope in hell of winning (which there isn't).

Economic reality applies. Don't try to make money off the OTU, and you'll probably* be fine.

*standard disclaimer of responsibility

 

[Thunderbolt]

I visited your site, Thunderbolt, and it looks good (my tour was rather limited because I'm on dial-up). But ... does anyone make money on your site via Traveller?

Unfortunately, I suspect you hastily did something you were not, nor ever will be, required to do.

A non-Traveller related picture got used as an album cover, while a SF themed image got used in a printed magazine. Neither it has to be said, on the basis of Traveller content.

I don't want to have to worry about whether I need disclaimers or not, whether the image itself must have wording embedded in it or not, or be concerned that if another was published for some monetary value that I was owing somebody money.

This way, I get to carry on without wondering if I've got myself covered properly.

 

[Thunderbolt]

Another thing I forgot to mention were several images that got used on the Sci-Fi Channel web site.

Again, it's the problem of looking over my shoulder all the time. I want to be able to say 'yes' without reservation if they ask me again.

 

[tbeard1999]

You don't have to do that now (unless you actually *want* to).

You're right, though, the whole thing is a legal nightmare. I doubt if most of it would stand up in court.

In reality, a great many things that are claimed to be someone's intellectual property probably would not stand up in court (in the US, at least, which is my area of expertise). There are two classes of IP that folks often confuse -- trademark and copyright. Both legal structures can protect a game.

Things like trademarks are pretty straightforward -- "Traveller" is a trademark owned by Far Future Enterprises for its roleplaying game. No other roleplaying game -- and almost certainly any other game of any kind -- can use the name "Traveller". Nor can it use a name that is "deceptively similar", the touchstone being whether *consumers* are likely to confuse the similarly named game with "Traveller". So, the "Traveler" RPG would probably violate the "Traveller" trademark. However, the "Traveller" line of walking aids for blind people does not FFE's trademark (or vice versa).

Even so, it gets very complex when trademarks are claimed for character names, imaginary cities, etc. Such things are denied trademark protection unless they are found to create a link in the customer's mind with the actual producer of the good or service. So, Harry Potter became trademarkable only when there was a series of books called "Harry Potter".

Copyrights are far more complex. You can't copyright ideas, only their expression. Like most simple statements, this is almost impossible to explain in a simple sentence. In the context of Traveller, copyright law protects the entire Traveller Book from being duplicated. Game mechanics (i.e., rolling 2d6 for attributes) cannot be copyrighted. Note that the name "Traveller" is *not* copyrightable. So, Avalon Hill could create a D-Day wargame called "The Longest Day" without infringeing Cornelius Ryan's copyrighted book.

When it comes to fictional constructs (character names, alien races and their names, etc.), the creator must first prove that the alleged infringer had access to the fictional construct. Not usually hard. But the creator must then prove that there is a "substantial similarity" between the original fictional construct and the infringing construct. Courts consider a hodgepodge of factors and predictability is low. In general, the more detailed and unique the character, the greater the likelihood that it will be protected.

The "scenes a faire" exception to the "substantial similarity" analysis is particularly relevant to fictional constructs. It denies copyright protection to material that is standard or common to a particular subject or topic. Thus a stereotyped fictional character, gadget or place is not likely protected (unless one copied the *exact* description of that character/gadget/place). So, the question is whether the construct is stereotypical to the genre. Hyperspace drives, probably yes. Aslan, maybe not.

The bottom line is that there is a tremendous difference between asserting that something is your IP and it actually being your IP. The problem is that it takes expensive lawyers to get a reliable opinion -- and even then, we don't always agree. The sensible hobbyist strategy is to pick your fights and ask for permission.

Caveat -- I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. This is not intended to be legal advice or to create an attorney/client relationship. Heck, I could be hallucinating all this stuff. So pay a lawyer for advice that you intend to rely on.

 

[Andrew Boulton]

I remember when this was just a game. Something we did for fun.

 

[Thunderbolt]

I remember when this was just a game. Something we did for fun.

I'm just looking at my copy of Traveller's Digest #8, and an advert for "The Imperium Staple, a monthly fanzine for Traveller", $6 for six issues, make cheques payable to.....

I imagine the guy had to ask permission to put the word Traveller in there, but all this licence X, licence Y, except when....yada, yada, stuff?

 

[tbeard1999]

I remember when this was just a game. Something we did for fun.

Well personally, I don't think that Mongoose or FFE is gonna be overly officious and arbitrary with their fanbase. Besides this being a marketing disaster, I don't really think that they've shown any inclinations in that direction.

Of course, both have legitimate business interests that they would reasonably want to protect. My advice would be if you're unsure about something, drop them an email and ask if they have a problem.

To MongooseMatt, I'd recommend having your attorney draft a very short non-exclusive licensing agreement that recites a nominal consideration and that can be revoked by Mongoose anytime. That way, ambiguous requests can be accomodated, yet Mongoose would retain the ability to pull the license if a problem arises.

 

[Andrew Boulton]

Marc's always been very relaxed about it. It's too early to say about Mongoose. Their initial rules - no OTU stuff anywhere, even free websites - would've killed the game stone dead (or just been ignored), but this seems to have been incompetence rather than malice. Their revised ones are better, but a lot of people are still worried and confused.

 

[far-trader]

Yep, and that worry and confusion is every bit as stifling as the initial rules to some, or many. This really needs to be hammered out quickly and correctly. Actually should have been done a while back, and did seem to be until this recent mess.

And am I the only one nervous about and reading ominous undertones in the "defracturing the game" mission statement? Maybe I skipped my paranoia meds

 

[Andrew Boulton]

It should've been hammered out before the public ever saw it, but Mongoose seem to like to publish first and reality-check it later.

Traveller was (and still is) too fragmented, but I doubt this will change that.

 

[casquilho]

It should've been hammered out before the public ever saw it, but Mongoose seem to like to publish first and reality-check it later.

Traveller was (and still is) too fragmented, but I doubt this will change that.

Amen to that. Mongoose had to have known this was going to come up. They can not be that dense. So this means they elected to have this mess by choice.

Daniel