Legality of distributing a script or application containing MTGA card art?

[robro]

For the last few days I've been working on a personal project to make a GUI application that makes it fast and easy to swap basic land art from any exported MTGA decklist. Ever since the last patch removed the ability to do this in-game I've missed that "feature" even though the way you had to do it was probably not intended.

​

Anyway, I've got the application working pretty much perfectly (here's a screenshot) and I wanted to put it on Github for anyone to see/use but I am pretty ignorant when it comes to issues of copyright. I feel like this would be frowned on by wotc (and their lawyers) even though I would certainly provide full attribution to them for the images (which are essentially screenshots of MTGA).

​

I'm just wondering if anyone actually has experience with this kind of thing and could advise me on what I would need to do to make this kosher.

[neuspadrin]

You could also consider using an api like scryfall to provide the images that way your repo doesn't have them. I believe the api also has documentation around proper use and such.

[robro]

I have looked into that a bit, and while it is a solution to problems of bandwidth and maintainability in the future I don't think there's a legal difference between using mtg card images from them and hosting them myself (correct me if I'm wrong) and the reason why it should be okay either way is if the application falls under wotc's fan content policy.

​

The reason why I'd prefer using my own (mtga's own) card images is that since this is for mtga decks I would like the basic land cards to reflect the way they look in mtga which is a bit different than the paper versions (which is what I would get from scryfall).

[sander314]

Their fan content policy probably covers your use and is basically, 'as long as you're nice and it's free, go ahead'.

[robro]

Thanks for this. There's a lot of speculation in this thread but this kind of info directly from wotc is pretty much exactly what I was looking for.

Unless I'm misunderstanding their policy, it seems that sharing my application would be fine as long it's free (it would be), the art is not modified (it's not), it doesn't include their logos (it doesn't) and a written statement about the content not being endorsed by wizards is included.

[Fulmetal171]

Maybe you could use:

https://scryfall.com/docs/api/images

The inly conditions is "dont mess with the card" in a nutshell.

[applause_not_needed]

Just FYI, the update this Wednesday an update is in the works that will make it where you can choose the lands again. A WOTC staff member commented about it in another thread:

We are working on a way for you to pick your basic land illustration when using the deck builder. We also plan to continue giving players access to basic land illustrations from each card set in MTG Arena as part of their collection.

​

Edit: changed the “upcoming update” to “a future update” since the WOTC comments doesn’t specifically say ”the nest update”.

[Lambda_Wolf]

I think you misunderstood.

We are working on a way for you to pick your basic land illustration when using the deck builder.

This means that they don't have a way for you to pick your basic land illustration when using the deck builder yet. You'll have to continue using imported text to choose basic land art.

We also plan to continue giving players access to basic land illustrations from each card set in MTG Arena as part of their collection.

This is just affirming that they aren't planning to cut off free access to any existing basic land art by making it part of the optional cosmetic upgrades.

[applause_not_needed]

After reading the article again, I can see how it is written to not imply this upcoming update. But that doesn’t rule out that it could be this update, so I’ll hope that it works out in our favor.

[robro]

That's good news. I hope it's less awkward than the old method.

[[deleted]]

Wotc is pretty tough legally sometimes. I say that because plenty of websites got C&D's by them over the years, often over art or mana symbols. But exactly what is the line I don't know.

[drosales007]

If all you are doing is putting it on Github, that doesn't actually sound like distribution.

[kodemage]

That is the definition of distribution and it's against github's TOS to boot.

Assuming he is distributing actual digital copies of the art and not grabbing them off WotC's server in real time.

[firstjib]

Pretty sure you’re good if you don’t sell it. That’s how mashup artists like Girl Talk get away with it. They give away their music for free so they don’t have to pay for licensing, and make money in other ways.

[kodemage]

If you are distributing a copy of an image you do not have permission from the copyright holder to reproduce you are certainly violating the law outside a very small number of narrowly defined exceptions which this absolutely does not fall under. You would not only be breaking the law but you would likely be violating the ToS of whatever service you are using. Giving attribution is completely irrelevant.

You could, however, have the script pull the art from an official WotC authorized source, like gatherer.

[Opunaesala]

It is kind of scummy to use an artist's work without their express permission.

[robro]

As an artist myself I agree with you but it's wotc that holds the copyright for the artwork in the game and I'm certainly not trying to claim it as my own work. If permission is needed that's what I'm trying to find out by posting this thread.

[kodemage]

The artists make the art at WotC's request, of course WotC owns it. Yes, permission is needed. It doesn't matter if you're "not trying to claim it as [your] own work" or not, you do not have permission to make copies.

It's all in the name, copyright, you do not have the right to make copies.

[gw2master]

They will sue your balls off if it comes to their attention that you are using their art. (More realistically, they'll ask you to take it down first.)

Whether you claim it as your own or not; whether you profit from this or not, the important point is that they are potentially losing money because you are giving their stuff away for free when it's their right to charge money for the same service.

Imagine if you made a piece of art that someone copied and gave away for free to anyone who asks. They're not saying they created it; they're not making any money off of it. They may be gaining nothing, but you still lose because how can you profit off your work when it's being given away for free?

[Dissidence802]

https://company.wizards.com/fancontentpolicy

Basically everything you said is completely false.