I would say that its on the fence, its close to derivitive but i dont know if it quite crosses the threshold. I would say from my knowladge of copyright law that at the very least it could go eaither way depending on the judges mood, what he had for breakfast, lunar cycle etc.
Scrambling the buildings etc wont solve the problem, the issue at hand is the first factor is regarding whether the use in question helps fulfill the intention of copyright law to stimulate creativity for the enrichment of the general public, or whether it aims to only "supersede the objects" of the original for reasons of personal profit. To justify the use as fair, one must demonstrate how it either advances knowledge or the progress of the arts through the addition of something new. A key consideration is the extent to which the use is interpreted as transformative, as opposed to merely derivative.
Also how does Commons:Fanart say there may be no problems they say the exact opposit in fact.
Part of the idea of oga is that the art on it is all free to use and that people dont have to wory about being sued when using work fom it.
The only way that work like this can be allowed is under fair use. Unfortuinitly this work probably wouldnt fall under fair use as it could be consideered a direct market substitute for the original.
Also the title is not an issue as names cant be copywritten as such its the only part of the work that is legal :(
The real question here is what makes your game different/better/etc from all the other games out there. You have class's and power/def/life thats all we know and frankly about as generic as it gets.
First off you dont need a patent and it wouldnt help you having one as even Wizards of the Coast's (who is owned by a 4 billion dollar company) patents in regards to MTG have been hard to enforce for them due to the nature and historical evolution of card games. That said you may have some revolutionary idea, just its been my experience that very rarely is there anything new under the sun. If you do have some revolutionary idea and you dont have the $$ for a patent I recomend investing in a Provisional Application for Patent just note that there are some strict rules in regards to those however you can do it yourself check out this example (tho its a good deal of work) and only costs $125 (as you qualify under cfr 1.27) compared to the $7-9k (minimum) for a real patent with similer protections for a shorter lifespan, and a provisional patent is a good steping stone into a real patent.
Second if you have any information on the cards done? For example are all the rules complete, the cards designed etc or at the moment is it just an idea in your head? You dont need art to complete the rules and the first set of cards, if you havent done that yet I recomend starting there. If you have done that I recomend telling people that you have that completed, and sharing some of your ideas wouldnt hurt eaither.
Lastly at this time it seems you cant pay the artist, but if you got $$ via kickstarter would you? If so how much would they get paid? Creating unique art and design layouts for the cards, even a meger 50 cards is months worth of dedicated work so keep that in mind. Also do you plan to make the game open source?
I would say that its on the fence, its close to derivitive but i dont know if it quite crosses the threshold. I would say from my knowladge of copyright law that at the very least it could go eaither way depending on the judges mood, what he had for breakfast, lunar cycle etc.
Scrambling the buildings etc wont solve the problem, the issue at hand is the first factor is regarding whether the use in question helps fulfill the intention of copyright law to stimulate creativity for the enrichment of the general public, or whether it aims to only "supersede the objects" of the original for reasons of personal profit. To justify the use as fair, one must demonstrate how it either advances knowledge or the progress of the arts through the addition of something new. A key consideration is the extent to which the use is interpreted as transformative, as opposed to merely derivative.
Also how does Commons:Fanart say there may be no problems they say the exact opposit in fact.
Part of the idea of oga is that the art on it is all free to use and that people dont have to wory about being sued when using work fom it.
The only way that work like this can be allowed is under fair use. Unfortuinitly this work probably wouldnt fall under fair use as it could be consideered a direct market substitute for the original.
Also the title is not an issue as names cant be copywritten as such its the only part of the work that is legal :(
We have a modular building system for our game using blender library linking, may give you some ideas http://tempestintheaether.org/content/blender-26-library-linking-modelin...
http://opengameart.org/forums/show-your-project
you can post all those however we prefer open formats, ie .blend over .max
Its pretty hard to irritate people around here :)
The real question here is what makes your game different/better/etc from all the other games out there. You have class's and power/def/life thats all we know and frankly about as generic as it gets.
By open source I mean something like http://wtactics.org
Also it seems you are more intrested in a trademark then a patent, they are distinctly different.
First off you dont need a patent and it wouldnt help you having one as even Wizards of the Coast's (who is owned by a 4 billion dollar company) patents in regards to MTG have been hard to enforce for them due to the nature and historical evolution of card games. That said you may have some revolutionary idea, just its been my experience that very rarely is there anything new under the sun. If you do have some revolutionary idea and you dont have the $$ for a patent I recomend investing in a Provisional Application for Patent just note that there are some strict rules in regards to those however you can do it yourself check out this example (tho its a good deal of work) and only costs $125 (as you qualify under cfr 1.27) compared to the $7-9k (minimum) for a real patent with similer protections for a shorter lifespan, and a provisional patent is a good steping stone into a real patent.
Second if you have any information on the cards done? For example are all the rules complete, the cards designed etc or at the moment is it just an idea in your head? You dont need art to complete the rules and the first set of cards, if you havent done that yet I recomend starting there. If you have done that I recomend telling people that you have that completed, and sharing some of your ideas wouldnt hurt eaither.
Lastly at this time it seems you cant pay the artist, but if you got $$ via kickstarter would you? If so how much would they get paid? Creating unique art and design layouts for the cards, even a meger 50 cards is months worth of dedicated work so keep that in mind. Also do you plan to make the game open source?
Pages