Product concept: Dungeon Fantasy adaptation guides for famous adventures

[mburr0003]

Originally Posted by sjmdw45

If there were for example an eight-page booklet on converting monsters, traps, and treasures in Against The Giants or Ascent of the Leviathan to DFRPG's ruleset, would you pay $8 for it?

No, because 'conversion' is dead simple and I'd never do a direct conversion anyway. I alter, fold, spindle, and mutilate everything enough to remove most easily recognizable traces of the original creature, set-up, etc.

[sjmdw45]

Originally Posted by mburr0003

No, because 'conversion' is dead simple and I'd never do a direct conversion anyway. I alter, fold, spindle, and mutilate everything enough to remove most easily recognizable traces of the original creature, set-up, etc.

Hmm. Okay, maybe it's just me then.

I hope to someday be as adept at conversions as you are. For now, it's something that I cannot do in my head. Maybe if I print it out and mark it up I can do the whole thing in an hour or two...

[Refplace]

Originally Posted by Anthony

The copyright issue here is "that sure looks like a derivative product that requires permission of the copyright holder". So basically a nonstarter.

Originally Posted by ravenfish

In general, copyright law is vague enough that any even slightly debatable issue pertaining to it is resolved on the principal of "the side that can afford the best lawyers wins".

Originally Posted by sjmdw45

That expansive view would make essentially all Internet RPG forums illegal. I do not think that commentary on a book, while avoiding all copyrighted material, constitutes a derived work.

This is really the crux of the matter. Getting sued is expensive, even if you win. People posting something on the internet does not make it something you should consider legal, any more than you should consider it truthful.
Suing someone with no money is throwing away money, you might still do it - especially if your afraid of setting a precedent by not fighting for your rights but unless the defendant has money it is an immediate expense. Posting something on a company forum instead of a blogger or rededit forum increases the liability of the company hosting it. Especially if they are a competitor.
"Fair Use" is probably safe, like referencing how you would handle certain encounters in a product. But a full or even large scale conversion - even if just page references is something I consider high risk and would never endanger my favorite company by trying.
SJG publishing something like that (as suggested in the first post) would be even more of a risk.
Anyone wanting to do that could try it on their own blog or something and they are less likely to get sued than SJG if posted here. I am not recommending that however as I still think its illegal, at least highly questionable.

Another thing to consider is that most authors would rather write their own adventure than just convert someone elses.

[sjmdw45]

Originally Posted by Refplace

Anyone wanting to do that could try it on their own blog or something and they are less likely to get sued than SJG if posted here. I am not recommending that however as I still think its illegal, at least highly questionable.

This would be a stronger argument if anyone could point out anything at all about the sentences "on page 58 of Tomb of Annihilation, for the statue of a man riding a mastodon, use a Stone Golem (Monsters pg 54) with SZ +4 and ST 60. Try to Overrun the PCs (Exploits pg 40) to do damage and get a chance at rear attacks," which violates anyone's copyright or trademark. If someone can't even describe what they're suing you for, they're not likely to get very far with a judge.

But okay, clearly this is not a thing I can hope to buy from anyone so I will have to do it myself.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by sjmdw45

This would be a stronger argument if anyone could point out anything at all about the sentences "on page 58 of Tomb of Annihilation, for the statue of a man riding a mastodon, use a Stone Golem (Monsters pg 54) with SZ +4 and ST 60. Try to Overrun the PCs (Exploits pg 40) to do damage and get a chance at rear attacks," which violates anyone's copyright or trademark.

"Tomb of Annihilation" is trademarked by Wizards of the Coast. If you delete "on page 58 of Tomb of Annihilation", what's left of the sentence is pretty generic... and also not a conversion at that point.

[sjmdw45]

Originally Posted by Anthony

"Tomb of Annihilation" is trademarked by Wizards of the Coast. If you delete "on page 58 of Tomb of Annihilation", what's left of the sentence is pretty generic... and also not a conversion at that point.

Trademarks aren't copyrights--they exist to prevent brand confusion. That sentence does not violate a trademark.

Now, if I published that sentence under the title "Tomb of Annihilation", that could be violative. But referring to ToA page 58 is not, any more than referring to iPods is, even though iPod is trademarked by Apple. Selling your own product as an "iPod" could create confusion though, hence the need for trademarks.

Trademarks are NOT a way to prevent people from referring to or commenting on your product.

Can you describe what about that sentence constitutes a trademark violation in your mind?

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by sjmdw45

Can you describe what about that sentence constitutes a trademark violation in your mind?

The point at which you claim your product is a conversion of their product.

[Refplace]

Originally Posted by sjmdw45

Trademarks aren't copyrights--they exist to prevent brand confusion. That sentence does not violate a trademark.

Trademarks are NOT a way to prevent people from referring to or commenting on your product.

Can you describe what about that sentence constitutes a trademark violation in your mind?

I'm not a trademark lawyer and I wouldn't trust anyone other than a trademark lawyer (and probably want a second opinion even then). If there is a chance of breaking the law it seems ill-advised to do so. Up to each of us to assess our own risks of course, but its not reasonable to ask someone else to take that risk. Writing a conversion to make money off of someone else's work seems like its crossing a line. I do know that the argument you have to have the original to use it won't stand up as a defense. The question then is just are you benefiting from someone elses protected work?

Making dungeons or adventures is just not that hard, the maps can be time consuming but less so these days than when I started playing RPGs.
If I wanted to use an adventure I could just take it and swap out monsters or traps as needed.

[sjmdw45]

Originally Posted by Refplace

I do know that the argument you have to have the original to use it won't stand up as a defense. The question then is just are you benefiting from someone elses protected work?

It won't stand up as fair use defense of using someone else's copyrighted material but that assumes that you're using someone else's copyrighted material in the first place. And the point is that conversion notes don't rely on anyone else's copyrighted material because they are fixing an omission: anything that would be a copy doesn't need to be in the conversion notes in the first place! Hence the use of page numbers, and why nothing in that sentence is copyrighted by anyone but me: I am the one originating the idea ofsubstituting an upsized DF Monsters-based stone golem and tactical notes on exploiting its size. If this was in the original I wouldn't need to write anything.

Originally Posted by Anthony

The point at which you claim your product is a conversion of their product.

Where in that sentence does that happen?

Or are you conceding that it's not a violation on its own, but suggesting that a booklet called Dungeon Fantasy: How To Run Tomb Of Annihilation is inherently brand confusion?

I think this discussion is not productive and I really enjoy your other posts so I don't want to offend you further. Feel free to have the last word.

[restlessgriffin]

Originally Posted by sjmdw45

Yeah, that's one of the things that inspired my thinking on this issue.

I don't think it's even slightly debatable though that my writing "on page 58 of Tomb of Annihilation, for the statue of a man riding a mastodon, use a Stone Golem (Monsters pg 54) with SZ +4 and ST 60. Try to Overrun the PCs (Exploits pg 40) to do damage and get a chance at rear attacks," is not a violation of copyright. Nothing in that sentence is copyrighted (except implicitly by me).

Isn't all of Tomb of Annihilation copyrighted? Also I think this is too specific to be profitable, but also so specific as to possibly warrant legal action. I'm sure they'd at least get cease and desist letters from WOTC/Hasbro lawyers. Losing a legal fight could potential bankrupt a company. The rewards don't justify the risk.