Updates on Lawsuits?

[AndrewTall]

They key issues are money and copyright.

If you start charging, then you owe WOTC money for exploiting their trademarks.

If you start posting up vast tracts of their stuff then again you could start hitting issues as you are stopping them selling stuff.

BR.net has - or at least had - a joint IP agreement back when we were the official site.

[Mirviriam]

or at least had

Had official status?

[The Swordgaunt]

As long as I my efforts to legally purchase a product is blocked, I will support piracy. There is a conflict of paradigms going on at the moment. The industries are clinging to mechanisms that is basically unchanged since Gutenberg. With the age of the computer comes new rules, and outlawing the future will not neccesarily prevent.

I'll just stop there, before the rant takes off...

[Thelandrin]

Good place to stop, Swordgaunt. We cannot condone piracy in these forums, especially not of WotC materials, however hard they make it to buy their books legally.

[The Swordgaunt]

I know, Thelandrin. Normally I wouldn't have mentioned the P-word on the site at all, but with the topic being breached, I just had to point at the elephant

[Arjan]

BR.net has - or at least had - a joint IP agreement back when we were the official site.

i never had an official notice that we arent any more.. so until then i still consider the licence we have as valid..

this meaning we are allowed to use the copyrighted material here on BRnet WITH the wotc copyright notice..

i am currently thinking about how we can fill the wiki with material straight from the core books (using book quotes, citation etc...) without violating copyright rules.

when we come up with a guideline, those who DO have the core books are then encouraged to help fill the missing stuff fot those that lack them

[Elton Robb]

I sure wish they had an open policy towards old material, but I understand where they come from - I'm very familiar with copyright law, and in their position I would probably do the same thing; prohibit republication of old intellectual property in order to prop up sales of new material.

* sigh *

I'm sick of this whole stupid thing, and I'm leaning very far on the Libertarians' position of no Copyright. I think it's being abused too much to be of any use anymore. I think we should get rid of them altogether. Or, 15 years individual copyright; and for the life of the publication + 7 months for Corporate copyright.

[kgauck]

Most people who write for a living, and game designers are certainly in that boat, earn far less than others who have the same level of education. Taking away copywrite reduces their income still further. Especially in the smaller companies.

If some guy invented a game in the 80's and there is still interest in it, and copies are occasionally sold, why should he not get paid? He did something, added value that someone else is willing to pay for.

Remove copywrite and you remove not only an incentive to write for a living, but in many cases the possibility of doing it. If game designers need a day job to pay the bills and game design becomes a hobby (hobby = work with no pay) the amount of game goodness we consume must decline significantly.

Plus, Elton, how would you feel if whenever you created a render, other people could use it, make money off of it, and never had to credit you or pay you for using your labor and creativity?

[Elton Robb]

Most people who write for a living, and game designers are certainly in that boat, earn far less than others who have the same level of education. Taking away copywrite reduces their income still further. Especially in the smaller companies.

If some guy invented a game in the 80's and there is still interest in it, and copies are occasionally sold, why should he not get paid? He did something, added value that someone else is willing to pay for.

Remove copywrite and you remove not only an incentive to write for a living, but in many cases the possibility of doing it. If game designers need a day job to pay the bills and game design becomes a hobby (hobby = work with no pay) the amount of game goodness we consume must decline significantly.

Plus, Elton, how would you feel if whenever you created a render, other people could use it, make money off of it, and never had to credit you or pay you for using your labor and creativity?

I support the limitation of copyright. It's getting out of hand, because if copyright is carried in perpetuity, like what they are trying to do; generations down the road won't be able to enjoy what we are producing.

Although getting rid of copyright is sound, the best thing to do is to limit copyright. 15 years for the individual, and for a Corporation: for the life of the publication +7 months. Therefore, if a company takes a product out of publication, its copyright runs out in seven months.

The true danger about Copyright is that its outdated in today's Information age. Take this except from The Libertarian Case Against Intellectual Property Rights for an example:

"More importantly, modern electronic communications are simply beginning to make copyright laws unenforceable; or at least, unenforceable by any means short of a government takeover of the Internet — and such a chilling threat to the future of humankind would clearly be a cure far worse than the disease. Copyright laws, in a world where any individual can instantaneously make thousands of copies of a document and send them out all over the planet, are as obsolete as laws against voyeurs and peeping toms would be in a world where everyone had x-ray vision."

This is so true. The only way we can aquire 1st edition and second edition materials right now is through peer-to-peer download torrents. They'd have to be scanned by someone and put up on the Internet by that someone. Wotsey took a foolish stance by taking everything down when they found out that someone pirated a book of theirs.

Wotsey punished every honest man, woman, and child for what one pirate did. And that still doesn't stop piracy of their books. At all. As a result, they are depriving future generations of several of the greatest games in History and allowing piracy of Dungeons and Dragons 4e books to flourish.

Under current Copyright Law, they are allowed to do this. However, if D&D Org through 3rd were forced to go into public domain, either by limiting Copyrights or by revoking Copyrights; these games can be supported and printed by publishers who will print them. And radical and moderate Wotsey fans can still buy 4e. Wotsey wouldn't lose revenue.

After all, are Rich Baker and Colin McComb still getting royalties for sales of Birthright material? They aren't. So, what's good about holding on to something that you don't support?

So, what can someone do in light of infringement? Well in the case of infringement on their intellectual property, Wotsey really can start a boycott. If 4e is "stolen" and being printed by another producer, Wotsey can organize a boycott and tell people to buy the official version of 4e.

This version of 4e is our official version of the game, they say. Buy ours out of company loyalty. This will eventally force the other producer to either substantially revise the game (YAY!) or stop producing 4e (YAY!). Win-win situation.

Limiting copyrights maybe the best way to go; but the ideal situation is to repeal the laws that protect them altogether and let consumer justice outside Government enforcement take care of the rest.

Either way, future generations will profit (as Steamboat Willy will be available for everyone to watch, and 1st Edition AD&D will be available for everyone to play).

So, in the case of Birthright, without Copyright we'd get a BR for everyone. As you realize, Dundjinnmasta and Vicente are arguing for a 4e type of Birthright. And under current law it looks like they will get their way. However, we revoke Copyright and BR.net can stand to support those fans who prefer 2e and 3e for their Birthright; and fans of 4e can buy the Official version from Wotsey. Everyone wins, we can play Birthright the way we want.

Also Arjan would be able to publish a version of the wiki for rennumeration of his efforts as a non-profit. He wouldn't have to rely on donations to keep BR.net up. All of the proceeds could go to the upkeep of the website. Everyone wins.

[kgauck]

To hope for the failure of 4e to be willing to use the abolition of copywrite as a means to that end is throwing the baby out with the bathwater. You would kill the game industry. Perhaps you would prefer to see it in the hands of hobbyists, but people like John Wick earn an income, however merge from their writing. Without that income they would be like everyone else who had to get a job and leave gaming to occasional weekends.

Regarding the copywrite alarmism, most of the issues surrounding the internet could be resolved with a return to the Fair Use rules that existed prior to the early 90's and good copy protection for content.

Reducing protection to publication +7 mos would make all of academic publishing impossible. No form of academic publishing remains active for more than 7 mos. While this might not make monographs impractical, it would destroy the very useful academic journals. Likewise for games which have very small print runs and often don't get re-printed.

I thought it was very cool for WotC to distribute materials as pdfs The fact that they had to stop is the fault of people who distributed their copies widely. Just as its the fault of thieves that we have to lock our doors, its the fault of thieves that we have to lock away the game content.