Standard disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. Apply however many spoonfuls of salt you would like to the following (and I encourage you to do your own research on the the topic if you doubt what I have to say here).
An oft-mentioned factoid is that you “can’t copyright game mechanics” and, therefore, people are free to make supplemental material for RPGs and distribute (or sell) them publicly.
This is an overly simplistic reading of the law.
First, game mechanics cannot be copyrighted, but the specific expression of those game mechanics can be.
Second, there’s a lot of case law — albeit none of it directly related to RPGs — which suggests that game mechanics describing a piece of protected IP are effectively copyrighted as an expression of that copyrighted material.
Why? Well, for obvious reasons, really. For example, the Star Wars universe is protected through copyright whether you describe it in movies, TV shows, novels, radio dramas, comic books, or a myriad of other forms. Why the heck would the Star Wars universe suddenly become open season because somebody used game mechanics to describe it?
So, no, you can’t just create a game or a game supplement featuring Luke Skywalker and lightsabers and Force powers because “game mechanics can’t be copyrighted”.
What about something like D&D? Well, the case that WotC (and other RPG companies) make is that the mechanics of the D&D game are describing a specific fictional universe. Some of the elements of that fictional universe are obviously generic enough that using them wouldn’t be a violation. But a lot of them are unique and their aggregate whole is certainly unique. This has never been specifically tested in a court of law for an RPG (as far as I know), but given the other case law that exists it’s pretty clear that the RPG companies would win. (And if they didn’t, the law would be changed about 5 picoseconds later. Disney and other major IP corporations don’t want their property becoming effectively public domain because they licensed a board game.)
(This is all before you add in the additionally murky waters of trademark and patents, of course.)
Luke Skywalker and lightsabers are not game mechanics, though.
I am not aware of anyone making knockoff supplements that reference the setting of a game under the justification that rules are not copyrighted.
It’s true that Luke Skywalker and lightsabers aren’t game mechanics. It’s just irrelevant and has nothing to do with what I wrote.
And what tends to happen are not people explicitly saying that they have the right to make a Star Wars game (although that does happen). What usually happens is that people don’t recognize that the D&D lore they’re ripping into their “generic” game by way of the D&D mechanics is, in fact, equivalent to Luke Skywalker and lightsabers.
Well, Justin, most “clone” RPGs – specifically those that are clones of rule systems for IP specific games (Star Wars, for example) generally tend to skirt the core IP anyway. I can’t think of any clone games that have done what you’re suggesting is wrong (and, for the record, I agree with you). Although with that said if there IS someone out there saying “You can’t copyright game rules therefore I can make a clone of the Star Wars d6 rules and call my game Star Wars and have Luke Skywalker and Jedi and a Death Star, nyah nyah nyah.”
I mean, what most authors are doing is (to take the Star Wars argument to it’s logical conclusion) is saying “Well…we have…Dude…Spacetraveller and his energy saber and he is a Psychic Cavalier of the Psychic Order, he flies a Cross-Wing fighter” (etc etc)
So who’s out there doing that?
Fun fact about intellectual property law: you will likely be bankrupted by legal fees even if you’re in the right. Welcome to the reason why I will NEVER invest or participate in a tech startup.
I think what you say is pretty common sense. You could never get away with making an unlicensed Star Wars supplement by arguing “game mechanics” (at least not calling it Star Wars).
The argument I often hear is more along the lines of “Well, I should be able to produce and publish a supplement to the D&D 5th edition rules without permission from WOTC, or paying a license fee, because game mechanics can’t be copyrighted!”
But things are a little more complicated. This is amply demonstrated by Wizards of the Coast’s lawsuit over the similarities between ‘Magic: The Gathering’ and ‘Hex: Shards of Fate ‘. MEchanics may not be copyrightable, but there are other IP questions such as patents, trademarks, copyrights surrounding the rulebook itself, etc.
I’d recommend checking out this article which covers the questions in some details:
http://www.quietspeculation.com/2014/05/understanding-the-wizards-v-hex-lawsuit-in-plain-english/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
What about a Lord Kai and a Jedi?
Lord Kai uses telekinetic and other mental abilities and Jedi uses the force.
Both of them can move object, sense *things* and fight with the same improved abilities.
You can’t make an unlicensed game featuring Lord Kai, either.
If you’re asking why Lucasfilm doesn’t own the copyright to the generic concept of “psychic warrior”, that’s really a more elemental question of what copyright does and does not protect.
There’s nothing stopping you from making an RPG featuring generic psychic warriors. But where you would potentially run into problems is if you’re using the mechanics which have been used to describe Jedi Knights to describe your generic psychic warriors.
Similarly, you can make a movie featuring generic psychic warriors. But if you assemble your movie from pictures of Luke Skywalker, you’re going to run into problems.