License of ToME's lore?

[IvenGray]

Would it violate any law if the lore/setting of ToME is used in another game? Say, what if a free CCG game faintly refers to Maj'Eyal as a plane in its multiverse and uses the settings to design a set of cards? Is it permitted or welcome?

[Radon26]

if DG allow it, it is more than welcome.
and i wouldn't expect him to forbid... but its his right so only he can't fully answer..

[mikekchar]

If you use a GPL license, then even DG can't forbid it (unless the content is under a different license and I didn't notice it). This is the reason I donated money to Tome4 (and I should really top that up a bit when I get a chance). I want to reward DG's initiative and encourage other game authors to do the same.

Of course choosing a license for any project is something you should do with care, but the advantage of a free software license like the GPL is that it creates a kind of consortium where people who agree to share with each other are free to use a pool of assets. Tome4 shows that you can make money on a GPL game, even when sold in a fairly traditional way.

Slightly off topic:

I remember hearing DG talk on Roguelike Radio where he said that something like 70% of the people who are connected to the server at any given time are paying donators/customers - even though anyone can download the game for free. I also noticed that both Stone Wardens and even Ashes of Urok have a GPL license in them. Because DG owns the copyright for the entire game (other contributors have signed over their copyright), he could have easily dual licensed to "protect" the for-pay content. In other words, if you pay for a copy, you would get a different license that would allow him to add non-GPL extensions. He chose to keep the code free (as in freedom), which shows a real commitment to the customer even though it potentially raises risks for himself.

DG, if you are reading (and I know you are busy), I'd love to know if you ever regretted the GPL licensing and if there was anything you would do differently the second time around.

[Grey]

mikekchar: GPL and intellectual property are entirely different things. You can still own the IP of something that is open source. Coding licenses have nothing to do with this.

IvenGray: If it's a free game then having references to ToME shouldn't be a problem. DarkGod used to use Middle-Earth in this way, after all ;) But if you want to make a commercial game then you should really ask for express permission from the owner if you want to incorporate any significant content.

[darkgod]

As others have said, the licence of the game has nothing to do with that

As for the matter, yeah it really depends of the nature of the game; I usually love fan work so I have nothing out-rightly against it Email me some more details and we'll see

[mikekchar]

Not to be argumentative, but the GPL *definitely* says what others can do with your IP. It specifically says you can make derivative works as long as you follow the restrictions. Of course the original author still owns the IP, but he has granted a license for others to use it. In this case, the license specifically says the license is granted in perpetuity. You can't revoke the license.

I want to be very clear because the lore source files have the GPL on them!!! If the lore is not GPL, then please put a different license on it!!!!! I can not stress this enough -- currently the lore is released under the GPL. *Anybody* can make a derived work from it for *any* purpose they wish -- novel, song, new game, TV game show... anything. Nobody has the right to say what they can or can not do as long as the abide by the GPL. That's what a license if for. If you don't want to issue a license, then don't do it. Please don't issue a license and then say, "Oh, but only some of it is covered".

I really, really hope this is not another case of "oh we want to be open source so let's choose the GPL" without understanding what the license actually says. I'm willing to try to help sort it out, if this is the case, but your options may be very slim if you really didn't want to release the lore under the GPL.

[Grey]

The GPL header in the files refers to the software, and GPL is explicitly a software license. It does not include the intellectual property and ideas, nor the story elements presented. If Disney make a GPL licensed game starring Mickey Mouse that doesn't make Mickey open source. GPL would be impractical for commercial works if it worked otherwise.

Perhaps this can be made clearer in the game with an intellectual rights statement.

[mikekchar]

I don't want to be argumentative, but your are really misunderstanding copyright law and the GPL.

From the first term in the GPL:

0. This License applies to any program or other work which contains a notice placed by the copyright holder saying it may be distributed under the terms of this General Public License. The "Program", below, refers to any such program or work, and a "work based on the Program" means either the Program or any derivative work under copyright law: that is to say, a work containing the Program or a portion of it, either verbatim or with modifications and/or translated into another language.

The GPL is usually used for software, but it can be used for any work. A "work based on the Program" refers to any derivative work under copyright law. In other words, you can apply the GPL to anything that is covered by copyright law. You can make any kind of derivative work of a work under the GPL if you abide by the license.

The term IP has come up a couple of times in this thread. IP stands for "Intellectual Property". This usually refers to one of three things, but it is not really a legal term in itself. The three things that most people are referring to are:

- Copyright
- Patent
- Trademark

The GPL is a license under copyright. Version 3 also grants a patent license, but I think Tome is licensed under V2, so that doesn't really apply. I don't think anyone here has any patents for anything in Tome anyway.

There may be trademarks in Tome. This would cover the use of certain names (for example Maj'Eyal). If the trademark were recognized, I wouldn't be able to make a game with the name Maj'Eyal in it. Personally, I think there is probably a good case that certain names are trademarks in the game, but it would depend very much on the country and whether or not they were registered. Again, I don't think this is what we are referring to anyway. In the question of a GPL Mickey Mouse game (which would never happen because Disney will not want to allow derived works...), I would not be able to use the name Mickey Mouse in most countries because it is a trademark. Everything else in the derived work would be permitted.

Which leaves copyright. The GPL spells out explicitly what someone must do in order to make a derived work. If you have not done so already, I highly suggest reading the GPL in entirety, carefully. If you have any questions, I will be happy to help as much as I can. I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice, but I have a *lot* of experience with software licenses (both free and proprietary). I can give you the benefit of my experience.

Copyright covers many rights. It differs from country to country, but most of the people who will read this probably live in countries that are covered by the Berne convention. A summary from the ever helpful people at wipo (slight sarcasm...) http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/bern ... berne.html

You will notice that in addition to other rights, there is something called "moral rights". This is the right to be associated with a work and to choose *not* to be associated with a derived work. My understanding is that the GPL does not cover moral rights at all, so in most countries you can demand that a derived work is not associated with your name. In other words, you could make a sequel to Tome, but in many countries you couldn't advertise it as "The sequel to Dark God's Tome", without permission.

That's it! There is nothing more. Ideas are not copyrightable, neither are they patentable (although the novel implementation of an idea is often patentable). The expression of an idea in an artistic work is copyrightable, but Dark God has unfortunately plastered a big "Here is an irrevocable license to make derived works" on the expression of those ideas. Like I said, there is no more IP and no more legal protection.

I'm truly sorry if this was not intended. I'm equally sorry for the tone of my previous message which betrayed my disappointment.

I do not believe that separating the two pieces (that covered by the GPL and that not covered by the GPL) is nearly as straight forward as you imagine. Please read the GPL *very carefully* about what things can and can not by mixed with GPL code. I think you are probably fine moving the lore out of the code, but I would load it separately. Definitely put a different license on it! However, anyone who are already received material with a license grant (the GPL) can exercise that right any time in the future. The obvious thing you can do is to revise the material when you put it under a different license. People who have the old version can make a derived work of that, but they won't be able to make derived works of the new version (welcome to the world of extending copyright to Mozart pieces 250 years after he died).

And yes. Making commercial games with the GPL is tricky if you do not wish to license all your assets as well. It's not impossible, but you have to be very careful. This is what prompted my question

As I said, this is a pretty big disappointment for me. I don't have much time to work on outside projects, but I limit myself to projects under the GPL. It is much easier to understand what you are and are not allowed to do. I encourage you to sort this out as soon as you possibly can so as not to deter people like me from contributing to the project. Possibly losing my (up to now) non-usefulness is not such a terrible blow, though

[IvenGray]

Thanks for your replies!

And I'd better just to give a quick answer about the game to DG here, since things are largely unsettled and I don't have that much detail to talk about for now, so maybe no need for an email. Basically it's a free digital CCG game. The lore is settled within a multiverse, to allow for the creation of various expansions. I am hoping for making an expansion to include cool things like Mindslayer, Sun Paladin, Solipsists and Wayists from ToME into the game. But probably it wouldn't be directly stated in the game that the expansion features the world of Maj'Eyal, to prevent inconsistency between the lores. ToME shall be credited, though.

[Grey]

There may be trademarks in Tome. This would cover the use of certain names (for example Maj'Eyal). If the trademark were recognized, I wouldn't be able to make a game with the name Maj'Eyal in it.

Trademark is what I meant when I referred to IP. The term Maj'Eyal, as well as some of its prominent characters, would be covered by trademark. Other things like race/class names, general story ideas, and so on, are not. As you said, you can't copyright ideas, and ToME borrows plenty from other fantasy works anyway. Other legal cases have shown you can copy games very directly and get away with it, regardless of the licensing.

I guess I'm not sure about how to protect against third parties taking whole chunks of story and selling them. I doubt DG would be happy about that happening. But I guess it's not too likely either.