news

[Larry D. Hols]

Hallo,

>>But posting those home-grown rules for others, or even sending them
>>to others, is a problem.  It violates copyright.  I'm not certain that AH
>
>Now I do believe that posting home grown rules is not a violation of
>copyright. It may be close to plagiarism. A set of rules can not be
>copyrighted as far as I know. The rules. The written expression of those
>rules can and is automatically copyrighted. The underlying system of rules
>of course can be patented.

        Any matter that uses the P&P name or closely reflects the P&P
mechanics in such a way as to be a virtual rendering of the P&P game, even
with changes, is suspect material.  This is why TSR clamped down on D&D
material in other magazines.  Nothing could be published that might
interfere with the development of the D&D line.  This included rules,
because TSR might have had another supplement in production or planning
that used those very rules or similar ones.
        This is a discussion I've had with industry professionals, and I
can assure you that many companies would rather be a little stern than have
problems defending their rights.  I doubt that AH is going to be majorly
concerned with P&P material, but is always best to work out an agreement
ahead of time.  If they have aboslutely no plans to pursue a new edition
ever, then I may be able to purchase the rights and establish my own online
policy : ))

Larry