Content market and TM work

[salcor]

I know the content market is in the future but after watching the Gencon videos and listening to some podcasts with Liz, I have a few questions. As a GM I am trying to use RW to run Star Wars Edge of the Empire from FFG. So if I take the time to enter in the Edge of theEmpire information for personal use, can I share it with of the Star War GMs? Of course I would not be able to charge for it since it is not my work, but would it evenbe allowed on the content market sinc LWD does not have a license with FFG? Is there going tobe a way export a database without putting it on the content market? The goal is not to pirate content from FFG but to leverage the community to share the creationof a major database.

Salcor

 

[Acenoid]

When in doubt ask ffg if they allow it. They hold the rights, how anyone else could say if it's safe?

 

[Parody]

It never hurts to ask; just don't hold your breath. Given that FFG's license with Disney/LucasFilm doesn't allow PDFs, why would they allow RW content?

 

[Chemlak]

If in doubt, don't do it.

Or, the other version: if you have to ask, the answer is "no".

In general, assume that a trademark holder will aggressively protect that trademark (because they will, due to being required to, to protect the trademark).

Which doesn't even touch upon the copyright issue: sharing through RW does not constitute fair use or extracts (unless you really are using less than 10% of the published work, which would be less than useless), and copyright doesn't care if you're making money or not, you're simply not allowed to copy it.

There is one exception to this: get a written (not an email or forum post) permission from the license holder. Send it to LWD. Wait for them to respond. If their response is positive, then share your work, and be prepared to spend a lot of time dealing with well-meaning community members flagging your content for violation.

 

[Dark Lord Galen]

Chemlak pretty much nails it.

"Fair Use" is constrained (pretty much) to your own personal use. not re-distribution, in any form, free or not. Although the definition of "personal use" varies... ie Character sheets given to you by your DM for your personal gaming group session. This is an accepted use of the sheets provided.

As a LONG time World of Greyhawk Campaign DM, I feel your pain.. WOC(now hazbro) has held us hostage in similar fashion for years.

This is also why in the case of D&D if you look at the bottom of,blank character sheets for example, in the back of most handbooks they purposely have a line defining the sheet is "Permission is granted to photocopy" (or a variant lingo). So unless that is present in the entirety of the book you are "creating" from, you're out of luck without that written authorization Chemlak mentions.

IMO......Now the "flip side" for what its worth... would Lucas / Disney come after you personally for "sharing" content you created based on their IP because you shared it (not sold it) with your fellows? Probably not.... Would they come after LWD and Realm Works Market Place, almost certainly. So asking if LWD would supply a place to conduct such exchanges is not likely to happen. They (LWD) simply would not want that sort of litigation risk, I would think.

 

[Pollution]

Here's how this is going to work.

If you try to sell it, you're toast.
If you try to share it with the entire community, you're toast.
If you send a copy to your buddy at your local brick and mortar store who runs SW, you'll be fine.
If your pal in Canada is going to run the same adventure, and you send it to him, you're fine.


There's a couple of ways to really figure out if you can share something or not.

Is it original? Share away.
Is it published? Can't share without permission.
Is it published, but you're only sending out a few copies? Have at it.

I think the best way to look at things would be to see what others are doing in the HL forums for content. A good example is White Wolf's God Machine Chronicles update. LW can't do it, a user here did it and is sharing it for free. CCP/Onyx Path doesn't care, so it's legit. BUT, if either CCP or Onyx Path said, "knock that shit off" then it would have to go the way of, "I did this a while ago, PM for details".

Giving 1,000 people a free RW copy of RotRL is a bad idea without permission from Paizo. Giving the 5 people who PM you for a copy will be fine, unless Paizo tells you to stop. Then you need to stop.

 

[Silveras]

It doesn't matter how many copies you give away.

If it isn't published under an open license that allows re-distribution, you're in the wrong.
If it is published under such a license, and you don't follow it properly, you're in the wrong.
If you give it away to one person, or 1000, and you don't have written permission (which includes the open license and abiding by it), you're in the wrong.
If you are not sure I am correct, ask a lawyer. If you aren't sure *you're*right, ask a lawyer. If you *are* sure you're right, ask a lawyer anyway.

Now... every time someone says "it's just one copy" or "it's just five copies", they help force publishers look for ever more restrictive means of securing their property. And it is a great way to scare the publishers that LoneWolf is negotiating with into refusing to participate. Because that's exactly the kind of thing they're afraid of.

Also, they forget that there's no guarantee the 5 copies you give away won't be given away to 5 more people each, who give those 25 copies away to 125 more people, who .. well, you get the idea.

Every time someone says "you're too small to be prosecuted", they forget things like Kazaa and Napster, where the host company paid for helping people steal intellectual property (even though they were sure that couldn't be held liable). And they forget how the recording industry has gone after individuals for judgments in the millions of dollars.. in order to make a point.

I'm not trying to be gloom and doom, or to single anyone out, but the attitude that "a little stealing is ok" is a rationalization I can't ignore.

 

[Dark Lord Galen]

It doesn't matter how many copies you give away..............................I'm not trying to be gloom and doom, or to single anyone out, but the attitude that "a little stealing is ok" is a rationalization I can't ignore.

@ all To clarify, My statements above were not with the intent to condone copyright infringement nor condone IP fraud. The Key words of focus in my rebuttal are Share and Probably

All content in a gaming community comes with the implied use of the information being shared. This is covered under "Fair & Reasonable Use". So, within that context, can I make copies of blank character sheets for my players, or create a "homebrew" of some rule set, Yes.

Can I as Silveras points out, make 5 complete copies for my friends of a rule book, no. Because as he also rightly points out, you have no control over where those copies go from there.

Is there case evidence to support that companies are willing to pursue those who abuse "fair and reasonable use" absolutely as Silveras detailed. but IF you limit your use to personal, it is unlikely and is not stealing as well. The burden of proof is theirs. they must prove your intent exceeds personal use as their IP defined.

• It is comparable to recording a song off the radio, making a mix cd. This is fair use. Song broadcasted freely over air waves.....
• Grey>Now lets say you then share it with your friends.
• More Grey> LEst say you make 5 copies on disc and your friends pay for the cost of the disc..... You didn't profit, but your friend could have done it themselves or bought them on iTunes... "could" the record label and the singer pursue you legally, maybe, but must first prove you exceeded the fair use of their material.
• Past Grey> You make copies to sell at your local record store... Illegal and now the store is also responsible.

This is where this thread really began.....

Will LWD be supplying a place in the market square for user created data? One need only look as far as Herolab to see the probable answer. But only Rob and those that advise him can truly say if or what that may look like and how it will be handled.

If we use Herolab as a litmus test of the possibilities, it is supported also by a community of very dedicated fellows. There are homebrew, modifications and even addendums of base rule sets. Does LWD profit from these efforts, no, at least not in a direct sense.... there may be some residual sales in herolab due to the great community effort, but that my friends is a perk, it is not something that LWD has to do to sell their product.

In this increasingly digital world we evolve into, Chemlak still puts it best.... IF in doubt... don't do it .... I would add.. or be prepared to suffer the consequences.
Lastly this will also differ in location as well, what defines IP law in the US may be different in the UK or elsewhere.. we have to remember there are MANY nations collecting and conversing here... not just "America".

And as Silveras also rightly points out stealing is still stealing, its akin to being "alittle pregnant" either you are or you re not.

 

[salcor]

Everyone,

Thanks for the feedback. To be upfront, I do not condone copy right infringement. It was a question that I was wondering about considering some discussions I heard from various podcasts. The interesting this is that many of the worlds we play are Copyrighted or trademarked, and as GMs using Realm Works we will probably enter in information for that game. So for example Greyhawk has been around since DnD began, and there are some amazing websites with decades of background information on Greyhawk, exactly in line with what would be put into Realm Works. Of course LDW will probably not be able to put it up on their content market. So how do GMs that are working on this shared world use their content which they generated for this world. It will probably be tied to an area in Greyhawk so it would be almost impossible to share without having the base realm.

Salcor

 

[Dark Lord Galen]

So for example Greyhawk has been around since DnD began,

Yep, First and Still best!!! heheh

and there are some amazing websites with decades of background information on Greyhawk, exactly in line with what would be put into Realm Works.

Like these (one of which I am a Forum Writer for (insert cheap plug here))
http://www.canonfire.com/cf/index.php<Moderated by Gary Holan (aka Pluffet Smedger .. the one who "wrote" the Glossography for the WOG box set)
http://greyhawkgrognard.blogspot.com/ <My friend Joe Bloch maintains this one
http://greyhawkery.blogspot.com/< My Friend Mort maintains this one.
and last but certainly not least, the Cartography Goddess
http://ghmaps.net/ My friend Anna Meyer's site

Of course LDW will probably not be able to put it up on their content market.

I disagree, will they be able to put entire modules on the site such as T-1thru4 or the G series, no. Not without some sort of IP agreement I'm pretty sure.

Will they be able to post various general errata, probably. Since it is not worth much without the core game. Details on country structure, rulership, resources, adventure plots should be fair game. With the understanding that a nod is given to the source. So I fully intend to lead the charge on all things greyhawk when that time rises...

So how do GMs that are working on this shared world use their content which they generated for this world. It will probably be tied to an area in Greyhawk so it would be almost impossible to share without having the base realm.

Yes, and remember the Flanaess is but a part of the WHOLE, Gygax built it that way with intent. To allow each DM to expand and detail the world as they saw fit for their "realm" and campaign.

And as our moniker at canonfire states..... "Editions Change GREYHAWK ENDURES"...

 

[Exmortis]

One thing to remember, if you are going to share published material, making sure the person you send it too has pruchased it as well will help ensure you are not accused of IP fraud.

If I took the time to say input Kingmaker into RW and a fellow GM wanted it, I would go to great lengths to make sure they have purchased the Kingmaker series in book or pdf form.

For two reasons;
ONE to support paizo and pathfinder, these are successful because people spend money, and I want that to continue;
TWO I hate piracy, and do not support it, however if you and I both own Kingmaker, and I give you the RW work for free, there is no real infraction here. Its a bit of a grey area, but it isn't fraud, both parties have paid for it, both parties have the right to use it for personal use.


I would be willing to share anything I did in RW that was published as long as I was reasonably sure the other party also had bought it. Though myself right now my campaign is my IP so if I choose to share it no one can claim fraud.

 

[Parody]

This does bring up some interesting questions like:

• Will we be able to share things privately to other users?
• What if I want to share something that depends on content shared to me?
• How does LWD plan on handling DMCA takedown notices and other copyright claims?

Part of a large list of things to think about as the Content Market starts to take shape (to the public, anyway).

 

[Silveras]

I've said this before, and I will repeat it here because I think it bears repeating:

RealmWorks is a new medium for publication. Putting material out on the Content Marketplace is publishing it. Expecting that all of the old rules about what you can and cannot do with the content apply just as if the Realm were a PDF is the safest way to approach things, especially early on. Nobody wants to volunteer to be the test case in court whether it is different enough to be handled differently.

Exmortis, your example of Kingmaker has a flaw. Just as the purchase of the physical book does not "entitle" anyone to the PDF version, purchasing either does not entitle anyone the RealmWorks version.

Even if you just give it away to a friend, you're re-publishing Intellectual Property that belongs to someone else. Is it worth the time to prosecute for one? Perhaps not.. unless it becomes common enough that a publisher feels it necessary to take *someone* to court to prove the point.

Working with your own content is fine.. you can do with that what you want. But if you even reference copyrighted material (such as creating a new adventure for Star Wars that refers to protected names from the setting -- Jedi, Sith, etc. -- or the events/plots of already existing works -- the destruction of the Death Star, the attack on the Rebel base on Hoth, etc. -- you're in the area where you're at risk.

How much risk depends on what licenses, including Community Use Policies, are available. It may be that just need to include a copy of the license with the work and include copyright information (such as re-publishing rules under the OGL), or it may be that there is NO such activity allowed (I believe LucasFilm keeps a tight grip on licensed materials, for example).

I hope that makes my concerns clearer. I see a lot of enthusiasm, but I would not want that to get people into trouble by mis-using protected content.

 

[AEIOU]

Methinks there needs to be a copyright primer attached to the FAQ....

 

[Mystic Lemur]

I think LWD is not in the business of giving legal advice. A disclaimer is one thing, telling users in a FAQ what is and isn't (or may and may not be) illegal is something that would actually increase their potential liability.

If you want legal advice, consult a lawyer.

 

[Silveras]

I think LWD is not in the business of giving legal advice. A disclaimer is one thing, telling users in a FAQ what is and isn't (or may and may not be) illegal is something that would actually increase their potential liability.

If you want legal advice, consult a lawyer.

Agreed.

 

[AEIOU]

It's already a minefield. Especially with this being an international community. And yes the correct answer is consult a lawyer; but without guidance, it's a disaster waiting to happen and LWD will be just as liable as the persons that (un)knowingly break the law. We already have several interpretations in this thread that may be well-intended but are likely not correct.

LWD has already paid the lawyers and knows the answers. They wouldn't have made the program if they didn't know the risks and how to mitigate them.

 

[Silveras]

LoneWolf may know *their* risks as the host of the cloud service and the provides of the Marketplace feature.

Those risks are different than the risks of people who self-publish their own content that is wholly their own creation, or which draws only on public domain material (legends of Atlantis, for example, or their own version of Bigfoot). Working with your own content is the lowest risk.. although even then talking to a lawyer would be advisable.

The risks are substantially greater if you start dabbling with someone else's intellectual property.

It is not LoneWolf's responsibility to provide legal advice. Actually, they may not be able to do so because they are not a law firm.. it may be illegal for them to even try to give legal advice.

It is the user's responsibility to make arrangements and know what is and is not allowed, and to abide by that.

LoneWolf may be in a position where their safest action is to cancel someone's sharing of content if notified by a publisher that it contains protected content. It is then between that user and the publisher (and the lawyers for each) to figure out.

While I obviously have no idea of the details, I would expect that topics like that are part of what LoneWolf and the publishers are negotiating as LoneWolf tries to persuade the publishers to support RealmWorks.

 

[Dervish]

How about we just go to the source and look it up instead
Here or Here

The first link covers Fair Use and the second is in regards to game copyright however they are both germain to our discssion.

 

[AEIOU]

@Dervish: Those are the types of links that belong in the FAQ. Thanks for pointing them out.

@Silveras: I appreciate your stance and respect your opinion. I see things from a cynical point of view and quite frankly, legel repercussions from someone doing something stupid with LWD getting caught in the crossfire since they are the sole host and distributor of all material is the reason I am such a vocal proponent of export capability. If the feces hits the fan, LWD is toast and we all lose. And it doesn't matter what promises were made for protecting our data, it's game over.

I'd be pleased as pie if Liz popped in and told me I'm unrealistically paranoid and crazy. I want to eat crow and sleep easier.