Forum

The current OGL states that we can use the Year Zero Logo but implies all trademarked games can’t be mentioned in the product.

Will the templates change this so that for new creations we can specify that the product is “Compatible with [INSERT IP]” to make it clear which version of the rules the product was created for, Forbidden Lands, Coriolis, Tales/Flood etc?

There is a template for each IP, but ... I am seriously no lawyer, but I think you are conflating the OGL with the Free League Workshop and I think they are two different things. As I understand it the OGL is for building games based on the Year Zero Engine without paying Free League for a licence. (Because it’s an “open” licence). The Free League Workshop is a storefront for selling licence- compatible stuff, both OBS (DriveThru) and Free League take a cut, so (I assume, as I say I am no lawyer) that the licence will be explicit in the terms when you sign up for the Free League Workshop, but it won’t let you sell Coriolis compatible stuff (for example) through another channel. 

Correct. The OGL and Free League Workshop are separate things:

OGL: A ruleset that you can use and adapt for your own open license games.

FLW: A community content program that allows you to publish and sell unofficial supplements for Free League games, via a specified portal at DrivethruRPG.

We will launch FLW in a few weeks and make everything very clear!

Thanks for the clarification, hopefully when the Workshop launches we will have all the details we need.

Is there any way of getting details prior to launch as I might be in a position to have a product ready on day one?

Is there something we can subscribe to in order to receive an announcement?

Is there something we can subscribe to in order to receive an announcement?

I’m interested too.

I'm looking into publishing a product that's compatible with Forbidden Lands, but I can't use an OBS community content program, the terms are too broad. If the FLW is like all the other community programs, it means:

1. You can never, ever publish the work anywhere other than the FLW -  not in print, not on itch.io, not anywhere.
2. You can't publish works derived from it anywhere else, either.
3. Fria Ligan gets a permanent, irrevocable right to republish your work, including creating and selling derivative works.
4. OBS can sign legal documents on your behalf, operating as your 'attorney-in-fact' if they need more contracts to clarify or affirm these rights.

I can't agree to these terms because I'd like to produce a Forbidden Lands  adaptation of an existing work. Because that work is already published, I'd be in violation of the agreement from day one.

Are there other options? I think publishing compatible products outside of the FLW is fine, as far as I can tell, as long as you're not copying any copyrighted material, trade dress or violating any trademarks. Yes?

Are there other options? I think publishing compatible products outside of the FLW is fine, as far as I can tell, as long as you're not copying any copyrighted material, trade dress or violating any trademarks. Yes?

Again I am no lawyer, but you have two courses available to you. You use the Year Zero Engine OGL, without mentioning Forbidden Lands compatibility, and without using any of the Trade Dress of FL, or, you approach Free League and negotiate a licence agreement. 

Again I am no lawyer, but you have two courses available to you. You use the Year Zero Engine OGL, without mentioning Forbidden Lands compatibility, and without using any of the Trade Dress of FL, or, you approach Free League and negotiate a licence agreement. 

I find there's lots of uncertainty about this sort of thing. Companies can create licensing opportunities to let people do things they can't already do, but creating a licensing program doesn't mean that all other previously legal avenues suddenly close.

For example, if WOTC created a "Reviewing Wizard" program, it would still be legal to review WOTC products outside of that program, it's not in WOTC's power to grant or withhold that ability. What you can't do is call yourself a Reviewing Wizard™. The hypothetical Reviewing Wizard license grants people new rights (e.g. use of the trademark Reviewing Wizard™ in a manner that implies a relationship or endorsement by WOTC), in exchange for new restrictions (perhaps wizards can only write positive reviews). Both sides get something they didn't have before.

Compatible products are generally legal—consider the third-party razor blades for Gillette razors, off-brand inkjet cartridges, iPhone-sized phone cases. In fact, it's even legal to refer to trademarks to explain this compatibility, as long as you're using the minimum reference and not creating impressions of a business relationship or endorsement (e.g. by using their logo).

So it's fine to produce Pathfinder-compatible products, and to say so; what the Pathfinder compatibility license grants you is new rights: the use of their trademarked "Pathfinder compatible" logo, and a font. If you don't use that license, you don't get those things, but you're still able to do anything you could have done before they created that license.

If you're not using trademarks in a manner that implies a relationship or endorsement, you're not using any copyrighted materials or (I guess) patents, what are you licensing?

That's my understanding, at any rate, so that's what I'm here to check out.

Well, as I say, I am no lawyer, and I have no idea whether “it’s fine” to produce Pathfinder compatible products without obeying the terms of their licence. F course that game itself is based on the original OGL, so it’s not their own rights they would be defending. I am aware that a lot of products say “compatible with the worlds greatest/oldest/most popular RPG” rather that naming Dungeons and Dragons. But maybe Hasbro are the only company with deep enough pockets to take people to court.