# NWN Conversions of existing modules - big "No-No"



## Morrus (Jun 14, 2002)

I thought I'd better mention this here.

As some of you may know, I'm going to be supporting a NWN module archive here at EN World.  Just to make it clear, this will be for ORIGINAL CONTENT ONLY.

This means that it's NOT for conversions of old WotC/TSR modules or for conversions of Bluffside or your other favourite d20 locations.

Not only that, but converting such a property and distributing it via these messageboards is also a big "No-No".

Why?  Well, I don't care what you do yourself.  But *I* am not planning on finding myself liable for distribution of another companies intellectual propoerty, and I certainly don't plan on being on the end of any legal action WotC or any other company might take.  And they will - they HAVE TO, because by law they must ACTIVELY protect their IP.  It's not about being nasty, or trying to ruin anyone's day - it's about properties that these companies could LOSE if they don't actively protect them.

So - to summarise - DON'T illegally distribute material via these boards.  But feel free to distribute your own original content, and, if you want to, add it to the archive I'll be hosting.  I'd like to support NWN as much as possible.

[Incidentally, if a publisher gives me explicit permission to distribute a particular file or module that incorporates their IP, either here on the boards or in the archive, then that's OK. ]


----------



## Krug (Jun 14, 2002)

Thanks for making it clear Morrus. I wonder if the d20 publishing community will view NWN as a blessing or a curse. It'll bring a horde of new gamers looking for modules but the exchange of files/IP could also undermine the publishers. Frankly I hope something can be worked out with Bioware regarding modules and charging for them as more companies doing d20/NWN stuff more good for the community as a whole.

[/public]


----------



## smetzger (Jun 14, 2002)

There are a few modules that could be legally done.  Some modules have a very large part desginated as OGC.  If one took the OGC material and then just made up the rest you should be able to release under OGL or D20.  

Green Ronin's Freeport module series is what I am thinking about.  All the text is designated as OGC.  So, you would only have to make up your own maps, of which there are only a few.


----------



## bushfire (Jun 14, 2002)

smetzger said:
			
		

> *There are a few modules that could be legally done.  Some modules have a very large part desginated as OGC.  If one took the OGC material and then just made up the rest you should be able to release under OGL or D20.
> 
> Green Ronin's Freeport module series is what I am thinking about.  All the text is designated as OGC.  So, you would only have to make up your own maps, of which there are only a few. *




Except for the little fact that NWW is neither D20 nor OGL.  

Open Game Content can only be re-used under the terms of those liscenses. Just because something is OGC does *not* mean that it can used like Public Domain.

So legally the only modules that could be done into mods and distributes are those that are Public Domain (mainly fan stuff). Note that all the OOP ESD's that Wotc is selling are not Public Domain.


----------



## Leopold (Jun 14, 2002)

no module nor anything that is OGL or OGC can be sent around the internet for public use..basically it's all homebrew for everyone...this sucks..plain and simple it sucks harsh


----------



## Ashtal (Jun 14, 2002)

I'm gonna try making this sticky, since we've already had someone post a link to such a beast. 

Please read this thread and act accordingly, folks!


----------



## Morrus (Jun 14, 2002)

I've seen around the net posts along the lines of "XXXX from Bioware said it was OK".

Bear in mind that Bioware CANNOT give you permission to use the IP of any compay other than Bioware.  Bioware cannot tell you it's fine to distribute "Tomb of Horrors" or anything like that, any more than I can.  Only WotC can do so.

Don't mistake "yes, it's technically possible with our toolset" for "yes, it's perfectly legal for you to do so".  Unless the owner of the IP tells you specifically that you can do so, then you can't.


----------



## Leopold (Jun 14, 2002)

Morrus said:
			
		

> *I've seen around the net posts along the lines of "XXXX from Bioware said it was OK".
> 
> Bear in mind that Bioware CANNOT give you permission to use the IP of any compay other than Bioware.  Bioware cannot tell you it's fine to distribute "Tomb of Horrors" or anything like that, any more than I can.  Only WotC can do so.
> 
> Don't mistake "yes, it's technically possible with our toolset" for "yes, it's perfectly legal for you to do so".  Unless the owner of the IP tells you specifically that you can do so, then you can't. *




but remember there is a difference between IP and OGL/OGC. This is gonna be a disaster of epic proportion if WOTC does not act on this and tell us what is and what is not allowed to be redone, this is gonna end up being a mess and bot the fans and the publishers are going to feel the backlash on this. 

I say stick a copy of the OGL agreement in the files and be done with it. The game itself may not be fully d20 compatible (and what game willl?) but it can still abide by the rules that wotc has put out (and it has) and should be regulated like anything out...

this IS the first true test of the OGL folks, you are seeing history in the making here...


----------



## Loric (Jun 14, 2002)

*Who at WOTC...*

Who exacly at Wizards would one contact to an answer about this stuff....have to go do a little digging now..

Loric


----------



## Leopold (Jun 14, 2002)

*Re: Who at WOTC...*



			
				Loric said:
			
		

> *Who exacly at Wizards would one contact to an answer about this stuff....have to go do a little digging now..
> 
> Loric *




try to find someone in their legal department, perhaps Anthony Valdera, maybe even someone in BioWare to find out who they spoke to at WOTC. Anyone in their licensing and service department. 

Avoid:

sales
marketing
Help desk
web masters.


those last few folk can't help you. Dig for the folk who have power and would know.


----------



## Grazzt (Jun 15, 2002)

Leopold said:
			
		

> *
> 
> but remember there is a difference between IP and OGL/OGC. This is gonna be a disaster of epic proportion if WOTC does not act on this and tell us what is and what is not allowed to be redone, this is gonna end up being a mess and bot the fans and the publishers are going to feel the backlash on this.
> *




WotC might act on it and issue a statement, but if they don't then no surprises there. Works just like everything else. If it is their property you cannot use it without their permission.



> *
> I say stick a copy of the OGL agreement in the files and be done with it. The game itself may not be fully d20 compatible (and what game willl?) but it can still abide by the rules that wotc has put out (and it has) and should be regulated like anything out...
> 
> this IS the first true test of the OGL folks, you are seeing history in the making here... *




No good. The OGL/d20 does NOT cover software. NWN is not being released under either and files as such cannot include the document.


----------



## Leopold (Jun 15, 2002)

Grazzt said:
			
		

> *
> 
> 
> No good. The OGL/d20 does NOT cover software. NWN is not being released under either and files as such cannot include the document. *




well this plain ole sucks then...


----------



## The Dungeon Nazi (Jun 15, 2002)

Morrus said:
			
		

> *I've seen around the net posts along the lines of "XXXX from Bioware said it was OK".
> 
> Bear in mind that Bioware CANNOT give you permission to use the IP of any compay other than Bioware.  Bioware cannot tell you it's fine to distribute "Tomb of Horrors" or anything like that, any more than I can.  Only WotC can do so.
> 
> Don't mistake "yes, it's technically possible with our toolset" for "yes, it's perfectly legal for you to do so".  Unless the owner of the IP tells you specifically that you can do so, then you can't. *




So the question now becomes, "What from Bioware can we cannibalize?"  How do you look at the IE games and discern what belongs to Bioware and what belongs to Wizards?  I can't believe that everything in BG2 belongs to Wizards just because it's D&D, since there's a lot of original content in there, artwork included.  The Realms provided a solid base, but then the Bioware staff went nuts turning books and maps and supplements into something visual and real.  Could one, say, recreate Bioware's 3D rendered representation of the city of Baldur's Gate, change names and NPCs and get away with it?  Since I'm certainly not a lawyer, I have no idea -- how do you separate intellectual property in a situation like this?


----------



## Morrus (Jun 15, 2002)

I'm no lawyer - but Bioware produced those games under license.  The IP remains with WotC, and they use it with permission.  I doubt that their license allows them to sub-license anyone to use that IP but I could be wrong.  I guess you'd need to ask them.


----------



## Luke (Jun 15, 2002)

Morrus said:
			
		

> *I'm no lawyer - but Bioware produced those games under license.  The IP remains with WotC, and they use it with permission.  I doubt that their license allows them to sub-license anyone to use that IP but I could be wrong.  I guess you'd need to ask them. *




In fact, Bioware switched publishers, after a slight legal tussle, and are now with Infogrames.

In a funny twist of fate (or perhaps through clever planning), Infogrames are the company that bought the D&D games rights from Hasbro, which is what killed the original MasterTools internet game strategy!

So, at least you know that something useful happened with the lost rights that torpedoed MasterTools. Bioware will probably be able to continue with new future work, under the Infogrames umbrella!!

In my view this isn't quite the best thing for pen-and-paper D&D. Like many, I'll really enjoy the NWN game, but it is still a game, which doesn't carry anywhere near the open flexibility of pen-and-paper imagination. Automated realtime games necessarily impose many, many restrictions on the full 3rd edition possibilities.

I remember the initial thrill all those years ago when Daggerfall came out. After a while though, all those impressive graphics and plots (good for it's day) had very much a sameness to it. It'll take a lot longer to start feeling the same way about NWN, but eventually (in it's current form), the sameness of the restricted mechanics will start to show...


----------



## Loric (Jun 15, 2002)

*This is from wizards customer service*

We have published no specific policy.  In general, we cannot provide permission to reproduce our copyrighted material in any format.

Adam Conus 
Wizards of the Coast - Game Support Asst. Manager 
___________________________________________________
I think it kind of sucks, particularly if no one is trying to make any money from it, after all, unless wizards is going to release modules like this for NWN, which I doubt.

Loric


----------



## Dinkeldog (Jun 15, 2002)

Loric, if instead of buying RttToEE from Wizards in paper format you get a free copy someone produced in electronic format, then even though no one has made money from the electronic format, WotC has lost a potential sale.  You do in fact harm WotC.


----------



## Loric (Jun 15, 2002)

*On the other hand...*

Modules such as those could serve an an introduction to, or at least exposure for, the ESD program WOTC has going.  Additionally, I would fully support the selling of these modules by an interested party who had WOTC permission to produce and market these things.  I can however see your point.

Loric


----------



## Leopold (Jun 15, 2002)

Dinkeldog said:
			
		

> *Loric, if instead of buying RttToEE from Wizards in paper format you get a free copy someone produced in electronic format, then even though no one has made money from the electronic format, WotC has lost a potential sale.  You do in fact harm WotC. *





selling it online and making a profit and selling the book are 2 different areas. Playing it online is one thing. Playing it in RL is another..this is just another mess that is going to hurt the gamers in the end as they are going to get frustrated and angry.


----------



## Grazzt (Jun 15, 2002)

*Re: This is from wizards customer service*



			
				Loric said:
			
		

> *
> ___________________________________________________
> I think it kind of sucks, particularly if no one is trying to make any money from it, after all, unless wizards is going to release modules like this for NWN, which I doubt.
> 
> Loric *




Copyright laws (regardless of how confusing they are) still apply even if ya don't make money off the product. WotC might/might not support NWN, I have no idea. Guess we shall see though.


----------



## kaliban (Jun 16, 2002)

*OGL content*

The only thing that I see preventing me from releasing my content(i.e. modules) as OGL is a restriction placed by Bioware/Infogrames.  NWN modules are not software anymore than PDFs are. If I write content, regardless of its format, I  believe I can release it under any ole liscence(OGL, GPL, LGPL, etc) I want, except in this case the EULA that comes with NWN may not allow it. I need to read more of it.

Assuming there is a conflict with NWN's EULA and the OGL what I predict you will see is people releasing their content in a divided format.  You'll see the map parts and the things that have to be done with the toolset released as one file that is released under NWN's EULA and then the scripts that make up the heart of a module released as a SECOND file that is released under OGL and thus allowing for use of OGC.  Then it will be left to the end user to put the scripts in the module.  Certain OGC (like places, maps,etc,) that can only be done on the toolset will not be able to released but the majority will.  


-Len


----------



## Skarp Hedin (Jun 16, 2002)

> NWN modules are not software anymore than PDFs are.




That's a really interesting point you got there.

I'm not sure I would agree with you, but I'm not sure I disagree either.  However, I'd agree that there's an argument to be made there.

You can't view a .pdf without Acrobat
You (presumably) can't view an NWN module without NWN

To most people, I'd imagine that .pdf's don't seem even remotely similar to software, since it's just words and images on a page, sorta like, you know, a book.. while an NWN module is certainly not very similar to a book.  Non-text vs. text media.  Maybe the license covers that, I dunno.  Interesting anyhow.


----------



## Cergorach (Jun 16, 2002)

Skarp Hedin said:
			
		

> *
> You can't view a .pdf without Acrobat
> You (presumably) can't view an NWN module without NWN
> *




What kind of BS is this?
1.) You can view pdfs with other programs than Acrobat (ghostview for example).
2.) You can't read a simple ASCII file without an OS. What's your point? Want to make a difinition of software?
3.) Could you please point me to the sentence that forbids me to make software for (use with) the OGL? I believe only the D20 Liscence restricts software production.
4.) Everything you make for use with NWN falls under the EULA, that also means scripts, thus making OGL -> free use for Bioware.


----------



## Thebalrog (Jun 16, 2002)

I guess Im missing the big copyright deal here.  


I mean in order for a person to be prosicuted for copyright infringment for adapting an old published and copyrighted module they have to make it an exact copy, right?

I mean, if you change a few things in the campaign then it would be ok, right?

If I'm wrong, then what are the rules.  It would seem that if you walk into a dungeon and get jumped by an orc party your infringing on someones rights.

So if Im wrong wheres the grey area.


----------



## Orcus (Jun 16, 2002)

It doesnt have to be an exact copy, derivative works can infringe.

It doesnt have to be sold by you, you making $ is not an element of copyright violation.

Clark


----------



## kaliban (Jun 16, 2002)

The conflict I possibly see with the OGL and NWN's EULA is under the last sentence of section 2 of the OGL.

_No other terms or conditions may be applied to any Open Game Content distributed using this Liscence._

-Len


----------



## herald (Jun 17, 2002)

OGL is a complete red herring <sp?> in this discussion. NWN is not being realeased under the OGL and doesn't have to satisfy any of it's requirements. It's simular to Kenser's Kalamar licence and White Wolf's Ravenloft. The reality of it is that all of NWN is closed IP wise. In addition it has been published that NWN reserves ownership on all "modules" developed with the NWN tool set. Since the EULA would conflict with the IP of WOTC, (or some other company) WOTC would more than likely not want to see any of there original adventures recreated without permission. 

Having said that, it's a fact that people will go ahead and recreate old adventures. And I know people with distribute these game even if they don't do it over these boards. While there is a potential for copywrite infringment that could possibly hurt some companies, I personally feel that the damage would be little and not worth mentioning. For a few thousand dollars a company could hire a mod specialist and create a expantion pack with a module that would be much better than most of us could create and then pursue a deal with Infrogrames to distribute it. 

Piracy will hurt the makes of this game more than people recreating this game in 3d graphics. 

But this is just my opinion and there might be some points I have missed.


----------



## smetzger (Jun 17, 2002)

1) A NWN module is not software.  Its is a file that has information in it just as a PDF, HTML, or RTF.

2) If a pen and paper module is OGC or OGL then there are no legal prohibitions from reformating that module into a NWN module file.

3) A great majority of pen and paper modules do not have enough content designated as OGC to be able to do a legal conversion (for the public) of the module.

4) One notable exception to number 3 is the Freeport series by Green Ronin.  Green Ronin has marked all text as OGC.  The only stuff they have kept to themselves are the pictures and maps.  So, it would be very easy to do a legal d20 NWN module of the Freeport adventures.  You would just need to make your own map of freeport, your own map of a pirate ship, and your own map of a small basement/dungeon (may be a couple of other maps needed I haven't looked at the 3rd module in awhile).

*:> Scott


----------



## Morrus (Jun 17, 2002)

smetzger said:
			
		

> *
> 2) If a pen and paper module is OGC or OGL then there are no legal prohibitions from reformating that module into a NWN module file. *




Yeah, there is.

You can't use OGC in conjunction with any other license.  You can't make a NWN module without using the NWN EULA.  Thus you can't use OGC to make a NWN module.


----------



## kaliban (Jun 17, 2002)

_ You can't use OGC in conjunction with any other license. You can't make a NWN module without using the NWN EULA. Thus you can't use OGC to make a NWN module._

Which is why you will see folks release OGL/OGC content that is not a NWN module that can be imported into one.  

-Len


----------



## Grazzt (Jun 17, 2002)

kaliban said:
			
		

> *
> Which is why you will see folks release OGL/OGC content that is not a NWN module that can be imported into one.
> 
> -Len *




But- the only thing they can release under the OGL/OGC is stat blocks, traps, etc. No "fluff" text, no maps, no descriptions, etc. Take a look at the module conversions on this site (and on mine)...that is all you can release because all the other stuff is IP of WotC.


----------



## Bagpuss (Jun 17, 2002)

Erm just out of curiousity...

But don't all the 3E D&D Monsters in the Monster Manual (and any in NWN), fall under OGC? Released under the OGL?

Therefore if you produced ANY NWN module that contains existing Monsters from the Monster Manual, it would breach the OGL, and be exploiting the IP of WotC. Or is that where NWN's EULA comes in?

Confused of Birkenhead


----------



## smetzger (Jun 17, 2002)

Morrus said:
			
		

> *
> You can't make a NWN module without using the NWN EULA.  Thus you can't use OGC to make a NWN module. *




I wasn't aware of the NWN EULA.  That sucks.  I wonder why they decided to include the EULA for any module and not just stuff they make available.

There is a way around it.  You could make a database that contains the module and then a program that converts that database to a NWN module format.  But, thats alot of work to get around a technicality.  

This is like the No Trespassing signs for the high power line throughways.  It just makes people with no mal intent into law breakers.


----------



## smetzger (Jun 17, 2002)

Grazzt said:
			
		

> *
> 
> But- the only thing they can release under the OGL/OGC is stat blocks, traps, etc. No "fluff" text, no maps, no descriptions, etc. Take a look at the module conversions on this site (and on mine)...that is all you can release because all the other stuff is IP of WotC. *




Unless the actual fluff stuff is OGL/OGC like the Green Ronin modules.


----------



## Grazzt (Jun 17, 2002)

smetzger said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Unless the actual fluff stuff is OGL/OGC like the Green Ronin modules. *




Yeppers- true enough. But- I was referring to the fluff text from the classic D&D modules.


----------



## 2WS-Steve (Jun 17, 2002)

What you'll likely have to do is ignore all those books sitting on your shelves and just make your modules as derivative of whatever stuff NWN ships with.

That should still give you a lot of freedom though and I imagine the EULA will grant you permission to use any monsters in the NWN base set and any orginal monsters you come up with using the rules as codified in the software. Essentially, the OGL and the core D&D books should have nothing to do with what you'll work on in NWN, just the software and game engine itself.

That still gives you a lot of freedom to make up your own material. But if you try taking stuff from open content sources or from D&D books that isn't included in the NWN module you'll have to worry about all the normal copyright issues surrounding doing that.


----------



## kaliban (Jun 18, 2002)

_But- the only thing they can release under the OGL/OGC is stat blocks, traps, etc. No "fluff" text, no maps, no descriptions, etc. Take a look at the module conversions on this site (and on mine)...that is all you can release because all the other stuff is IP of WotC._

Well, I am looking for a way to release OGC content.  So, lets say I find a nifty magic item that is released as OGC, by splitting the scripts from the maps then I just put the magic item in the script(I believe you can script a magic item, not 100% sure) and release the script.  Seperately I would release the module minus the script with the OGC content and allow the end user to integrate the script into the module. 

I'm not looking for ways to subvert people's copyrighted material in a malicious way. I'm looking for ways to release OGC content for use in a NWN module.   Right now, as the OGL is phrased you cannot include OGC content into NWN modules even with the permission of the OGC creator and thats a damn shame.     

-Len


----------



## Agamon (Jun 18, 2002)

Frankly, I'm afraid of making something "original".  What does that mean?  I have't read everything out there, how do I know I'm not creating an adventure very similar (or, apparently, even slightly similar) to something from, say, Dungeon #6 (which I've never read)?  How many thousands of adventures have been copyrighted over the last 30 years?  And you can't make an adventure that's even slightly similar to any of them.  Come to think of it, how are all those adventures completely dissimilar to each other?

It's a shame people are scaring the NWN community before it even does anything, striking a blow to the game.  Maybe it's intentional, I dunno.


----------



## Grazzt (Jun 18, 2002)

kaliban said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Well, I am looking for a way to release OGC content.  So, lets say I find a nifty magic item that is released as OGC, by splitting the scripts from the maps then I just put the magic item in the script(I believe you can script a magic item, not 100% sure) and release the script.  Seperately I would release the module minus the script with the OGC content and allow the end user to integrate the script into the module.
> -Len *




Not sure how new the EULA for NWN is, but here is a portion of it. I believe the scripts would be considered software and therefore cannot be released as OGL/OGC.

""Software" shall mean the game, toolkit, and all other software contained on this disc or cartridge, all updates and/or patches thereto, *any accompanying documentation*, all on-line components, restricted-access NEVERWINTER NIGHTS community websites, and other BioWare or Infogrames game-related services (including all CD-authentication components)."


Here is the link to the new EULA:

http://nwn.bioware.com/forums/viewtopic.html?topic=45334&forum=7


----------



## smetzger (Jun 18, 2002)

Grazzt said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Not sure how new the EULA for NWN is, but here is a portion of it. I believe the scripts would be considered software and therefore cannot be released as OGL/OGC.
> 
> ...




Well the scripts a private person would distribute would NOT be "..on this disc or cartridge..."  so I would say the scripts are safe.  However, the phrase "all on-line components" is very open ended.  It seems to be refering to on-line offerings by Bioware, but it could be construed more broadly as anything online.  I guess you could snail mail it to people. 

From reading the EULA I see why they want it to apply to a module.  Basically they don't want others making money off any modules.


----------



## Orcus (Jun 18, 2002)

> Right now, as the OGL is phrased you cannot include OGC content into NWN modules even with the permission of the OGC creator and thats a damn shame.




Not quite.

If I am the creator of the OGC, I am also its copyright holder. Just becasue I released that content as OGC does not mean I can not also release it in a NWN module by seperate license. But only the actual copyright holder can do that. Those trying to 'reuse' OGC cant do that.

Clark


----------



## kaliban (Jun 18, 2002)

True, the copyright holder can do what he wants with his own materiel(even release it to the public domain  ), but I was mostly referring to OGC by other content producers.

As far as scripts  being covered by the EULA, it's seems to be very vague language they are using so I'm not sure that a plain text file with script code is covered. Of course, I'd seek a lawyer's opinion first if I went this route but I suspect I'd have a leg to stand on.  

Besides the legal issues, I'm not sure it's quite that good of PR for Bioware/Infogrames to go after people who are simply trying to use OGC which is intended to be more lax about re-use than standard copyrighted materiel(assuming the OGL is used).  I'm not trying to recreate Keep on the Borderlands for distribution but simply incorporate content that ostensibly I already have permission to reproduce(i.e. OGC that is released under the terms of the OGL).  I think Bioware/Infogrames is more concerned about people trying to illegally reproduce and distribute copyrighted materiel without permission of the owner.

-Len


----------



## Hand of Evil (Jun 18, 2002)

This is what 'changed' mastertools.  Software rights to D&D are controlled by Infrogames.  Hasbro sold those rights.


----------



## Brisk-sg (Jun 22, 2002)

kaliban said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Besides the legal issues, I'm not sure it's quite that good of PR for Bioware/Infogrames to go after people who are simply trying to use OGC which is intended to be more lax about re-use than standard copyrighted materiel(assuming the OGL is used).  I'm not trying to recreate Keep on the Borderlands for distribution but simply incorporate content that ostensibly I already have permission to reproduce(i.e. OGC that is released under the terms of the OGL).  I think Bioware/Infogrames is more concerned about people trying to illegally reproduce and distribute copyrighted materiel without permission of the owner.
> 
> -Len *




Bioware/Infogrames would not be going after you for creating material based off of OGC material.  The holder of the IP you are publishing as a Neverwinter Nights module would be responsible for the protection of their IP.  

The OGC does not, to the best of my knowledge, allow for publication of Open Gaming Content in other forms such as Video Games.  As such, the OGL does not provide you the legal option of using the IP of someone else OGC in another form.

If you can obtain the rights to publish someones OGC from the IP holder of that specific content, then you can create a module.  But if you cannot obtain the rights from the IP holder then you can not legally distribute a module based on their IP.

The IP holder would be required to prosecute you to protect their IP.

Basically, when publishing to a format not specifically allowed in the OGL, then OGC is no diffrent then any other IP.  The OGL does not allow you to use OGC content for anything you want, otherwise it would be public domain.


----------



## rangerjohn (Jun 22, 2002)

*Big Hassle*

All I know is I'm glad I know this before I made a purchase.  Seems the chances of anyone making modules for NWN at his time is very slim.  You would have to be a lawyer, writer, and programmer to get it done.  Personally I'm none of those.


----------



## Emirikol_Prime (Jun 23, 2002)

No worries all.  All Morrus is saying is that this board cannot allow old skool conversions to be posted/distributed.

They will be made (and made well, I'm thinking) and they will be easily found online.  Be patient - I'm sure Wizards will have something to say about it but if they had a developer put the toiols out there, they have to knopw that this will happen.

Now worries - if they build it, we shall have it.


----------



## Lily Inverse (Jun 29, 2002)

Someone said at some point that, because of legal issues, it's impossible to use OGC content with NWN even if the copyright holder gives permission.  If he gives permission, he's also giving you license to ignore the OGL to the extent he deems fit.  Not sure how that would hold up in court, but that's what's being said.  You've been given a release NOT covered by the OGL, so that doesn't really apply.


----------



## Steven McRownt (Jun 30, 2002)

What about campaign settings?
Would be legal to "convert" NPCs, Cities or locations from Faerun or Toril?

If some of us play the P&P D&D in a FR settings and want to build a world for his players using NWN, could do that or we have to call Elminster in a slightly differente way (Al Minister, sort of Al Capone) just to not be sued?

Steven McRownt


----------



## Grazzt (Jun 30, 2002)

Steven McRownt said:
			
		

> *What about campaign settings?
> Would be legal to "convert" NPCs, Cities or locations from Faerun or Toril?
> 
> If some of us play the P&P D&D in a FR settings and want to build a world for his players using NWN, could do that or we have to call Elminster in a slightly differente way (Al Minister, sort of Al Capone) just to not be sued?
> ...




Have to be careful. Even derivatives of copyrighted material can get you into trouble.


----------



## JD2000 (Jul 3, 2002)

*Corporate Counsel for WOTC*

If you want to know who will probably know more about this it will be the Corporate Counsel for Wizards of the Coast. I got his profile from Martindale-Hubbell: 

JAMES S. SHAW   
Renton, Washington   
(King County) 

PRACTICE-AREAS: Intellectual Property; Business; Corporate. 

ADMITTED: 1995 

LAW-SCHOOL: University of Iowa (J.D.) 

COLLEGE: Duke University (A.B.) 

TEXT: Corp. Coun., Wizards of the Coast, Inc. 

BORN: 1968 

Just thought I would throw that out there for your consumption.

I'm an attorney and just from my point of view this could be very complicated for WOTC. So, it may take them a while before that figure out a policy on this. Anyway, just thought I would throw out a name I came by who will be involved in this decision.

Doug


----------



## Hawkshere (Jul 3, 2002)

Anyone who thinks a NWN module is *not* software is fooling themselves.  If there's a single line of script in it, its software.  The fact that the game exe acts as an underlying nwscript runtime layer doesn't change the fact that your module contains executable instructions.

Legally releasing any conversion module or obvious adaption thereof requires meeting two different requirements:

1.  All the classic (A)D&D modules belong to WotC, and you simply cannot use that material without their express permission.  End of story.

2.  The BioWare EULA states that any NWN modules that are release to the public become their property, and they reserve the right to both supress distribution or reuse any part of it in their own products.  (As an aside, it appears that you can *host* your original module on a sever, and still maintain ownership, as long as you don't distribute the source.)

So even if WotC wanted to give you permission for White Plume Mountian, they'd be in a bind due to Bio's EULA.  You'd have to get specific permission from both companies.

Basically, any NWN module adaptions of the old classics are going to be private copies or bootlegs, no matter how you slice it.  The OGL is completely irrelevant to NWN.


----------



## Tsyr (Jul 10, 2002)

Hawkshere said:
			
		

> *Anyone who thinks a NWN module is not software is fooling themselves.  If there's a single line of script in it, its software.  The fact that the game exe acts as an underlying nwscript runtime layer doesn't change the fact that your module contains executable instructions.
> *




So a PDF file with a hyperlink in it is software now?


----------



## Hawkshere (Jul 12, 2002)

Well, it's not _that_ hard to blur the line between data and instructions if you try hard enough, but come on!  A hyperlink?  If someone asked you to make a distinction between an anchor tag and an OnActivateItem script, which is the simple data and which is the algorithm?  A simple html page can be considered a mere 'document', but if its heavily laced with javascript?  Certainly, the ASP or PHP code on the sever that generated it would be software.

Rather than argue about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, the point was I've observed that some folks seem to feel an intense desire to apply OGL free love to NWN modules.  Between the OGL itself, and BioWare's EULA, there's no amount of rationalization or pretzel logic that will allow derivative NWN modules.  You can do completely new content, or you can change the copyrighted elements of the content around enough so that it's no longer considered infringement.  Neither option satisfies the understandable urge to faithfully convert the classics, but thems the breaks.


----------

