I had read somewhere that Dungeon World was published under Creative Commons, but I couldn’t find that anywhere in the book. Was I incorrect in my understanding?
I had read somewhere that Dungeon World was published under Creative Commons, but I couldn’t find that anywhere in…
I had read somewhere that Dungeon World was published under Creative Commons, but I couldn’t find that anywhere in…
All text is under CC-BY.
Fate core will be published under a CC license as well as OGL, but AFAIK DW is under traditional copyright.
No, it’s CC. Strangely it’s not written in the book, but it is on github.
https://github.com/Sagelt/Dungeon-World
http://www.dungeon-world.com/buy/
“Since Dungeon World is Creative Commons licensed people outside of Sage Kobold Productions can create products for Dungeon World too. You can find those on the Community Products page.”
OK, my mistake then. Genuinely odd that it is in the book – that implies the /book/ is not CC, though the text source is. Could theoretically cause issues later.
They seem to have left the CC-BY line out of the book itself, but you can see their intent on both the website and the Github project:
https://github.com/Sagelt/Dungeon-World/blob/master/LICENSE
Well, art and probably layout are still not free, while text is. That’s the official position.
Thanks Vasiliy Shapovalov and Steve Segedy for clearing that up!
And Lukas Myhan as well.
Releasing something under a CC license doesn’t obligate the creator to only distribute it under a CC license.
Dan Maruschak would you please explain how that works in practice?
well until the CC is tested in court it’s all theory. Fortunately, unless anything you make involves a product from a definitely closed product (WoTC, SJGames) our hobby is so niche that you’ll likely just a tongue lashing and asked to issue some kind of correction.
Joachim Erdtman I’m not sure I understand the question. Releasing a text via CC doesn’t void your copyright ownership of the text. You still hold copyright on the original, even if you say that people can copy it or make derivative works under the limited terms of a CC license. The creators themselves still have the full set of rights that any copyright holder would have, including distributing or selling copies that aren’t legally copyable.
Don’t think of CC/not-CC as a binary state that applies to the work as a whole, think of it as something that goes along with each particular copy of the original. The copy that they put up on Github has a CC license attached, so you can make all of the copies/derivative works of that stuff that you want as long as you abide by the license. That doesn’t mean you also have the right to copy from something that doesn’t have a license. “But the text is identical!” you say? Yeah, so just start from the stuff that’s explicitly labelled CC and don’t worry about it. The existence of a non-CC copy doesn’t erase the CC copy from the spacetime continuum. They can happily coexist.
Whether you understood my question or not Dan Maruschak you explained it perfectly. Thanks.
I wish we would have included a line in the book that said “the text of this book is CC-licensed” but unfortunately we didn’t think of that (and it might have been complex with the quotes in the margins).
The Github text is what we developed from except for the very last round of edits, where our text-to-layout process broke. We’re committed to DW being CC.