Nerun

I converted the SRD to markdown. Legend's SRD has been abandoned by the publisher, I know, but it's here. https://github.com/nerun/Legend-SRD

I submitted a PR #2 that divides the document into chapters, but without revising its content and formatting.

Yup, it's there: https://publicrecords.copyright.gov/detailed-record/35444491 I want to say, in the Copyright Office.

New answer: yes, logo is still valid:

Matthew Sprange gave me this answer. He forgot to reply about the compatibility logo though.

Hi there, I downloaded this compatible logo and this "license" (authorization) to use the logo from Mongoose years ago, but i can't find this in their site anymore. Anyone knows if this is still valid? Anyone can still use this logo for free and without authorization? Legend Compatible Logo.txt

Thank you very much!

I was reading the official OpenQuest SRD page and it's moved out of the OGL and is now Creative Commons CC-BY. I'm not surprised because of crisis Wizards vs. OGL naturally. As a lawyer with interest in PI and copyright i have some doubts. I just want you to confirm what I think I know. As I understand ideas, systems, rules, methods, procedures are not protected by copyright: United States Code, Title 17, Chapter 1, §102. Subject matter of copyright: in general. Flyer n. 108, April, 2016. Games. U.S. Copyright Office. Circular n. 33, March, 2021. Works not protected by copyright. U.S. Copyright Office. "Copyright protects only the particular manner of an author’s expression in literary, artistic, or musical form. " (FLYER 108). So I imagine that D101 Games changed all the descriptive literary text that were a direct copy of other SRDs, in order to get rid of them. Notably Modern SRD, SRD 3.5 and Legend SRD (OpenQuest SRD v1.01). Swords & Wizardry did something similar. Since they have used just SRD 3.5 was easy to move to SRD 5.1 released under CC-BY 4.0. Essentially a "rebase". OpenQuest did something like a rebase when moved out of Mongoose's RuneQuest SRD 2006, since it's become illegal when they lost the right to use "RuneQuest" TM, then adopted Mongoose's Legend SRD. From Chaosium FAQ: Q: Can I rely on the Mongoose RQ SRD to publish material? A: No. Mongoose’s license for RuneQuest was terminated in April 2011. At that point, Mongoose lost all rights to continue using the RuneQuest trademark, or to create and publish material derivative from the previous copywritten material, or to issue any sublicenses based on that agreement. Since Mongoose no longer had any rights to RuneQuest, it has no ability to issue a third-party license to that material (which is all an OGL is). So this is my question. Is this what happened? Is my analysis right?

With the new BRP:UGE released under ORC License, what happens to BRP OGL? BRP OGL was just 23 pages, never liked that. And it was very restrictive. I always thought it was a catch to avoid competition.

Seven changes in the new edition: https://www.chaosium.com/blogbasic-roleplaying-universal-game-engine7-changes-in-the-new-edition/

About APP and CHA, please read 1.1 in charter: Uses the following Characteristics. They may, however, use other names... So one can name CHA as APP, no problems. About Wound Levels vs. HP: minimum compatibility is needed. If it becomes too open, logo lost sense. About MP... Well I just forgot about it.

To be honest with you all, I don't know why I resurrected this idea. It didn't work in 2008, it wouldn't work now. Although it's a good idea. The only unified logo that really worked was the Wizards d20 System. Maybe it sounded like a good idea to me, and I got excited designing logos. That's it. But I know it will never be adopted. Companies have no reason to do so. About logo size/text you are right.

UPDATED to version 1.6: added drop lowest dice and gaussian distribution for a drop lowest roll!

Looks great @robertp!

I didn't know Delta Green, thank you! I have fixed "SIZ" issue in 3rd Draft.

Thinking here, maybe a "by-law" would be better than a "charter". A document written by many hands, with which the majority can agree.

Hmm... Maybe Characteristics list should be removed? Other alternative that comes in mind is to consider POW and SIZ as optional. Because i think that some Characteristics should be present. SIZ ok, not fundamental, and POW is essentially a stat for magic (or Will) and not all settings use both. But STR, DEX, INT, CHA and CON are a minimum.

Just trying new concepts: ugly, but creative. Inspired by Open Source Initiative logo. Copyleft symbol (C inverted) disposed like "%", reference to d100. And the green remember "traffic green light".

Uh, the similarity issues... That's a good point too. I will try new logos, maybe closer to peterb logo, and d20 System logo itself. And name... Change to Open D100 System sounds good! Translates the essence.

Thx! I agreed, BRP SRD logo is by far much better. The problem with BRP Open Game License is that it is not really free, no open at all. For example: prohibited content. If i create a Cthulhu game, i can't use BRP logo, nor even the BRP Open Game Content! And 2nd, if you use any portion of BRP SRD, you MUST use BRP logo, it's not optional. As a Linux user, I do like freedom. But no, i have no issues in use any other SRD (Revolution, Renaissance, Legend, OpenQuest, GORE, RetroQuest etc), i love all them! My point is to create a common logo to all these systems that can't use BRP logo. But anyway, doesn't means that people wants one. Maybe OQ prefere to use their own logo! Maybe i am wrong and Chaosium made BRP logo free to use in any system independent of which SRD are you using. But i think not. As i know, BRP logo is exclusive to games developed from BRP SRD and BRP (not so much) Open Game License.

Hail rune brothers! This topic is related to this very old one: D100-system charter (2008). Would be better you read that first (just 2 pages). Here a charter to use Open D100 System compatibility logo, with minimum game mechanics to be considered compatible in one-page PDF. It's just a draft. Sorry for my bad english, i am not a native english speaker. Feel free to correct my spelling in the attached document. I accept suggestions, including those that say: "abandon this idea". Charter requisites derives from the 2008 discussions and seems to me to be quite solid. There is some d20 System inspiration in this logo, of course. Please note that "D100" is not capable to be registered as a trademark in many countries. And I'm not interested in registering either. But Open D100 System may well be registered. Anyway, I think I have certain copyright on that expression and the logo at least. Nevertheless this is a work in progress. Open d100 System Charter.pdf Member @peterb also created a logo, never used i think. Attached bellow mine. Peterb said in 2008 it is in Public Domain.

UPDATED to version 1.4 Now with gaussian distribution!

Surely. I have started translating Legend. And declined to publish my MRQ-I translation in DriveThruRPG. In addition, i have removed my translation from other sites too. Thank you all of you for all clarifications!

Hey g33k, My apologies. Look, sometimes we are not capable to see the person in the other side, and since we just see words and words don't convey emotions properly, and they can't convey every nuance we think we are not offending the other person. Forgive me if you were offended by the way I argued with you. Not my intention, except for the last post, it was intentional, sorry about that too. I didn't liked that "incredibly poorly-thought", was not ok. Let's forget all this? Cheers, good night. Nerun.

No, no. Poor is yours logical-argumentative and abstraction capacity. It's a metaphor: refers to one thing by mentioning another. The problems about metaphor it that "one thing" will never be "another". When an interlocutor use metaphor only the characteristic similar is considerated, the others not. Of course a book can not be re-licensed or re-published or have it's contents used by others. But sorry, you can use the book (for reading, research etc) and you can re-sell it. Look at eBay and old book sellers. The characteristic I was highlighting with this metaphor is that, despite being out of catalog, both the book and the SRD preserve the inherent characteristic of their USABILITY. The usability of the book is to read, resell. The usability of an SRD would be to be able to create derivative works with that material. The problem with your metaphor (Ford/hybrid tech) was that Ford didn't licensed hybrid tech. But the the thinking was not wrong. Ford could not license hybrid tech, as Mongoose could not too. And they didn't licensed trademark... IF i was right and the text belonged to Mongoose. BUT i was wrong, the entire SRD didn't belonged to them. They haven't the right to do so. Since MY ENTIRE ARGUMENTATION was based in the belief that Mongoose owned text/rules and Issaries the trademark, it doesn't matter now. If the foundation of the house crumbles, the whole house falls with it. Even if it was a good house (this is another good metaphor to say that my argumentation was very good, but the foundation of my argumentation was not).