> They'd both be derivative
> of Greg's copyrighted material in countless ways.
This is an extremely sort of informal, to say the least, argument; could you relate it, in any way whatsoever, to the (or any) copyright law _definition_ of a "derivative work"?
I think that if the law on derivative works were as clear-cut as some have suggested, then TSR would be, even as we speak, sueing the bejeezus out of the author of that web page recently cited by Loren...
The difference between the two hypothetical cases I described would be that P:LoP&P would have to include and/or summarise large chunks of copyrighted Chaosium material, whereas the typical scenario doesn't (or at least, needn't) do this. If I wrote a Sword'n'spandex adventure set in Sartar, which referred to Gloranthan material only in ways such as "This adventure in set in Pavis (see RoC)", and "Enter Prince Argrath, stage left, in towelling headband (see KoS for further information)", then it's far from clear to me that it'd be a "derivative work", in the legal sense. Not that I plan on finding out, at least not the hard way.
Good luck,
Alex.
Powered by hypermail