|
Post by derv on Dec 4, 2016 15:10:11 GMT -6
WHICH says nothing about Gary, but says a LOT about you. Yes, it does say something about me. Just not what you are inferring. There are always two sides to a coin, Michael. Some people like to tell you there is only one side to a coin. And some people only like seeing that one side. The ugliness of the issue of IP and it's connection to money, as it involves TSR, is not in question, I think.
|
|
arkansan
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
Posts: 229
|
Post by arkansan on Dec 4, 2016 21:32:21 GMT -6
I'm sure people appreciate this generous opinion of Gygax's actions. There is another way of looking at this, though, that isn't as generous. WHICH says nothing about Gary, but says a LOT about you. I hardly see how entertaining the idea that certain actions could be viewed in multiple fashions is indicative of anything about a persons character. On the subject of the PDFs on Lulu, I received my copy of the Chainmail print. I contacted Lulu about the fact that the item had been removed from their store after the order had been placed. Apparently once it is sent off to the printers there is nothing they can do about it, and it seems they send it off rather quickly. As to the item in question, now that I see it I'm nearly positive someone put this up for themselves and simply didn't set it to private. It's 3rd edition 7th printing, also included is Jason Vey's document clarifying Chainmail in OD&D. It's a staple bound printing with glossy cover. Nice little booklet all things considered.
|
|
|
Post by Vile Traveller on Dec 5, 2016 2:17:37 GMT -6
Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be a way to contact publishers directly on Lulu, or things like this could be handled in a gentlemanly fashion.
If one felt a burning need to defend a copyright held by an unknown* third party, that is.
* As far as I'm aware no-one knows for sure that WotC has copyright.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2016 9:55:50 GMT -6
I am NOT advocating piracy or any other kind of law breaking, but I do think today's copyright laws are too archaic, copyright terms too long and penalties too stiff. Sensible reform is badly needed. We need more fair use exceptions, not fewer. We need to expand the public domain, not shrink it. This is an excellent point. We should go back to the state of fan fiction prior to D&D as described by @gronanofsimmerya. While honoring copyright is a good, not being draconianly unreasonable about copyright and allowing fair use is also a good. "The First Age had ended." " Your complete post is excellent and indeed "The First Age had ended." is very apt. As far as Chainmail goes I am quite certain that WotC has the copyright on that and may release a pdf and POD, if they become convinced that people want it. As I suggested elsewhere,when you buy old TSR from RPGNOW, make sure you leave a review and list items that you would like to buy. If enough of us do that the amount of items offered may increase from what was originally planned. In fact, now that I think of it, leave a review for every product you buy and list items not for sale that you would like to buy. Warriors of Mars will not be released by WotC simply because it would require a rewrite to legally release.
|
|
|
Post by krusader74 on Dec 5, 2016 19:46:20 GMT -6
A few years later we get Star Trek fandom. Though SF fandom and fan fiction had been around for years, Star Trek in the late 60s and early 70s turned the trickle into a deluge. Every Star Trek con had heaps of mimeoed Star Trek fan fiction magazines for sale, usually for cost plus a dribble extra. And Gene Roddenberry looked upon it and saw that it was good, because he knew that the only bad publicity is no publicity. WRT Star Trek fan-fic... I am a huge fan of Both of these series star original series actors, original series writers, and good production values. For example, ST:NV has featured: - Walter Koenig
- George Takei
- Grace Lee Whitney
- Barbara Luna
While ST:C stars Chris Doohan (James Doohan's son) as Scotty, Grant Imahara (from MythBusters) as Sulu, Jamie Bamber (from BSG), and Marina Sirtis as the voice of the ship's computer. The acting in these series is a little hammy, but, hey, so it was in the original. I much prefer these fan-made films to the recent Hollywood blockbuster, Star Trek: Beyond. Then again, I also prefer 0e and 0e-retro-clones to 4e and 5e. Maybe I'm overly nostalgic. ST:C has 7 episodes and funds itself through "Kirkstarters" that raise in excess of $200,000 per episode. CBS/Paramount owns the Star Trek IP. In the past, they've been fairly liberal about allowing this stuff. Recently, they've taken more of a hard-line stance: - CBS/Paramount shutdown ST:NV's attempts to make Norman Spinrad's "He Walked Among Us," an unproduced script he wrote for ST:OS.
- CBS/Paramount is in litigation against ST:Axanar which raised $1.2M to produce a new film. Here are some articles about it:
In general, fan fiction is illegal because it's a derived work, and it's only allowed to exist on the whim of the IP owner. To the extent that it provides the IP owner with free publicity, customer loyalty, and other benefits, they tolerate it. To litigate every piece of fan fic would also cost a pretty penny as well as drive customers away. There's a false notion that fan fiction is fair use if it's for purposes of parody or criticism, but that's not how the courts have ruled. See, e.g., Ruling for Salinger, Judge Bans 'Rye' Sequel, July 2009. Wikipedia has an article on the Legal issues with fan fiction.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2016 16:23:04 GMT -6
In general, fan fiction is illegal because it's a derived work, and it's only allowed to exist on the whim of the IP owner. To the extent that it provides the IP owner with free publicity, customer loyalty, and other benefits, they tolerate it. To litigate every piece of fan fic would also cost a pretty penny as well as drive customers away. There's a false notion that fan fiction is fair use if it's for purposes of parody or criticism, but that's not how the courts have ruled. See, e.g., Ruling for Salinger, Judge Bans 'Rye' Sequel, July 2009. Wikipedia has an article on the Legal issues with fan fiction. Some works/authors/publishers invite and approve of fan fiction and some do not. Fans should be cognizant of this. In the Salinger case the judge ruled that it was not parody or criticism so that does not really address the fair use issue. Here is an example of a smart author/publisher making the most of fan fiction in a way that benefits him and the fans to sell the cows milk:
|
|
|
Post by peterlind on Dec 6, 2016 19:13:31 GMT -6
What you might want to consider is availing yourself of the "Fair Use" doctrine if your sole purpose is to determine what parts of Chainmail were actually needed to play OD&D. It seems to me that if you are only "filling in the gaps" of OD&D, then this could possibly be tastefully and in good faith accomplished in a work of commentary, criticism, research or scholarship. Just my two cents . . .
|
|
|
Post by krusader74 on Dec 6, 2016 19:44:40 GMT -6
In the Salinger case the judge ruled that it was not parody or criticism so that does not really address the fair use issue. Actually, Judge Batts ruled that while Colting's book wasn't a parody of either Rye or Salinger, it did contain a criticism of Salinger...just not enough of it. I should have spelled this out in more detail. When I said: My point was: Neither parody nor criticism by itself is either necessary nor sufficient in determining fair use. The law governing fair use is 17 U.S. Code § 107 - Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use. This law tells courts that they must consider 4 factors when deciding if a derivative work constitutes fair use: - the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
- the nature of the copyrighted work;
- the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
- the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
Notice that neither parody nor criticism are even mentioned explicitly in the law. In Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. (1994), SCOTUS ruled that if the work is transformative and if the amount of this transformation is substantial, then it counts toward fair use -- the other 3 factors must still be weighed. The Campell decision also says that parody and criticism are both transformative. Transformation is what's important in determining fair use. A work may be transformative without parody or criticism. But even if a derivative work contains parody or criticism, - There must be a substantial amount of it
- The other 3 factors must still be weighed
Looking at Judge Batts 2009 37-page "Memorandum and Order" (here in PDF) in Salinger v Colting, she ruled: - Colting's book is not a parody of Catcher in the Rye
- Colting's book is not a parody of JD Salinger
But she did rule that - Colting's book is a criticism of JD Salinger
However, she also ruled that - This criticism of JD Salinger is not of a sufficient amount
Specifically, the criticism of JD Salinger only occurs on 40 pages of the 277-page book, and mostly in 1 chapter (Chapter 20). It only takes 12 of the 37-page decision to weigh the parody/criticism defense. The rest of the decision weighs the other 3 factors of 17 U.S. Code § 107, which are just as important in any decision. As an aside, the book has been published in Great Britain. It may be published in the US in 2046, after Salinger's copyright expires, assuming Congress doesn't extend the terms again!
|
|
jacar
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
Posts: 345
|
Post by jacar on Dec 7, 2016 9:26:32 GMT -6
One element missing within discussion of "Fair Use" is monetary gain. If youw ere to write your own DnD world and publish it for free on the internet, it would be fair use, presuming you are not also publishing vast parts of the rules that go with it. I've certain done some Lord of the Rings rules and have published them. A simple skirmish game. They can be had for free. Again, fair use. Were I to try and sell them, I am certain I'd run afoul of whomever owns the rights. That is exactly what happened with Warriors of Mars. It was a derivative work. It was being sold for monetary gain without permission or license from the ERB estate. They said stop. TSR stopped. There are still copies out there. There is a scanned copy or two as well. These can be had for free...as in nobody gains from it. Nobody ever will gain from it again. WotC does not own the rights to this book. ERB owns the rights to the subject matter but not the work in question. It being free, they cannot prove damages (monetary or otherwise) so they have no right to demand its removal. WotC cannot do it either. It's quite simply all about the dollars. If money is not involved and the work is not a direct copy, likely nobody is going to bat an eye.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2016 21:13:19 GMT -6
NO!!! Copyright does NOT let you distribute a work for free if it does not belong to you! I had to research the d**n copyright law for Tekumel Games when I was president. The US Copyright Law CLEARLY forbids you from distributing copies of anything you do not own, EVEN FOR FREE! The ERB estate has forbidden Warriors of Mars to be distributed, PERIOD.
|
|
|
Post by geoffrey on Dec 7, 2016 22:25:21 GMT -6
On the one hand we have the Scylla of contemporary copyright law being so byzantine and restrictive that it can amount to nothing less than book-banning. (For example, a book that ceased publication in 1948. The author is long dead, copies are $300 on ebay, and some publisher has that title in its copyright files. The chance of that publisher ever publishing that title again is a million-to-one. Yet one can't legally do anything about it. Book-banning in all but name.)
On the other hand we have the Charybdis of cheats and pirates and morons taking money out of an author's pocket by their illegal distribution of an author's work.
Between those two shipwrecks, there is a broad sea. I myself like the U. S. Copyright Act of 1790, passed when George Washington was president. Copyright lasted for either 14 or 28 years (author's choice). After that a work entered the public domain. If it's good enough for George Washington, it's good enough for me.
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Dec 8, 2016 9:45:34 GMT -6
This whole discussion is making my head swim. :-P
|
|
jacar
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
Posts: 345
|
Post by jacar on Dec 8, 2016 10:08:57 GMT -6
NO!!! Copyright does NOT let you distribute a work for free if it does not belong to you! I had to research the d**n copyright law for Tekumel Games when I was president. The US Copyright Law CLEARLY forbids you from distributing copies of anything you do not own, EVEN FOR FREE! The ERB estate has forbidden Warriors of Mars to be distributed, PERIOD. No. The ERB estate forbade TSR to distribute Warriors of Mars for profit. Like I said, you cannot sue for monetary damages if there is no money being made. It is an illegal copy of derivative work not under license by ERB. TSR "owns" nothing. You can't claim "ownership" of something you don't own.
|
|
|
Post by krusader74 on Dec 8, 2016 10:32:35 GMT -6
NO!!! Copyright does NOT let you distribute a work for free if it does not belong to you! I had to research the d**n copyright law for Tekumel Games when I was president. The US Copyright Law CLEARLY forbids you from distributing copies of anything you do not own, EVEN FOR FREE! The ERB estate has forbidden Warriors of Mars to be distributed, PERIOD. Yes, but ERB's rights aren't primarily copyrights -- they're trademarks. That's because ERB started writing and publishing the John Carter/Mars series and the Tarzan series prior to 1923. Stuff published prior to 1923 is public domain in the US. E.g., A Princess of Mars saw it's first publication in 1912. In fact, you can read most of these books free and legally on Project Gutenberg. Unlike copyrights, trademarks last forever, as long as you re-register them and use them in a commercial product once every 7 years. It's possible that Gygax/Blume incorporated into WoM materials from the novels still under ERB's copyrights. But it's more probable that (ERB claimed) WoM infringed ERB's trademarks. It would be wonderful if someone actually preserved ERB's C&D letter to TSR, and could provide the details here??? That may clear things up. Another point: A C&D letter is not legally binding nor is it a guarantee of a lawsuit -- it's just one lawyer's opinion of the law. C&D letters are an intimidation tool. Some unscrupulous companies have been known to issue C&D letters for properties they no longer really own. I'm not saying ERB did this! I'm just pointing out that it happens. That's one reason why research and getting another attorney's opinion matter so much. It would be interesting to know if TSR obtained an attorney's opinion letter? I find it very hard to believe that ERB sent TSR a C&D letter but hasn't sent one to archive.org, regarding WoM. ERB is very aggressive about protecting their grand dad's IP. Makes be think ERB did send a letter to archive and archive's lawyers told ERB they're full of sh-t. Here's a more recent ERB lawsuit that sheds some light on how they litigate: Dynamite Comics published comic books based on the PD John Carter/Mars and Tarzan material. ERB sued Dynamite, not for copyright infringement, but for trademark infringement, claiming Dynamite's use of the Tarzan and John Carter marks dilutes and damages the associated brands ERB controls. In particular, ERB was upset about partial nudity on the covers of these comics!!! This is called "moral rights" infringement. Here's an example cover image -- fair use, being for purposes of commentary and criticism only... Is that truly "pornographic"? ERB and Dynamite have now settled their dispute. The terms of the settlement have not been disclosed to the public. But Dynamite's Warlord of Mars books with their partially nude covers are still for sale today -- read what you want into that. No doubt: TSR could not afford to fight ERB in court back in 1974, when TSR was just getting started and had little capital. That's a big shame, because this whole WoM dispute might have been settled more favorably, like the Dynamite case cited above. OTOH, in that eventuality, WotC might now own the WoM RPG IP, and that might be just as bad...
|
|
|
Post by geoffrey on Dec 8, 2016 10:47:48 GMT -6
It looks to me that Dejah Thoris is wearing more on that cover than she wears in the books. Seriously.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2016 12:12:37 GMT -6
Dynamite's Warlord of Mars books with their partially nude covers are still for sale today [/a] -- read what you want into that. [/quote] BECAUSE THEY ARE PHYSICAL OBJECTS! Selling a physical object you own is NOT THE SAME AS LETTING SOMEBODY MAKE COPIES OF YOUR PDF! Sweet Crom's hairy nutsack, WHAT IS SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND ABOUT THAT!
|
|
|
Post by krusader74 on Dec 8, 2016 17:07:09 GMT -6
Dynamite's Warlord of Mars books with their partially nude covers are still for sale today -- read what you want into that. BECAUSE THEY ARE PHYSICAL OBJECTS! Selling a physical object you own is NOT THE SAME AS LETTING SOMEBODY MAKE COPIES OF YOUR PDF! Sweet Crom's hairy nutsack, WHAT IS SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND ABOUT THAT! Sorry Mike, but no: If you had followed the link in the quotation above to Comixology.com, then you would have seen that these are in fact ebooks, just like the PDF of WoM at archive.org, not physical objects.
|
|
|
Post by peterlind on Dec 8, 2016 17:25:45 GMT -6
FYI, there are other legal penalties for copyright / trademark violations above and beyond turning over profits . . . so your best course, IMO, is fair use or making up your own IP . . .
|
|
|
Post by foxroe on Dec 8, 2016 19:55:03 GMT -6
It doesn't matter! Disney owns everything! Watch what you say, the walls have Mickey Mouse(R) ears!!
/lunacy
|
|
|
Post by krusader74 on Dec 9, 2016 17:41:19 GMT -6
I have sent an email to Wizards of the Coast via their web interface requesting that they sell Chainmail again. I encourage others who are interested to contact them. If they get flooded with requests, they may take it more seriously. Here is the text of my message, in case you would like to use it as a template: I also sent email to custserv@onebookshelf.com asking for their assistance in this matter. Here is the text of that message: I will post back if I get any replies!
|
|
|
Post by krusader74 on Dec 10, 2016 15:41:51 GMT -6
I have sent an email to Wizards of the Coast via their web interface requesting that they sell Chainmail again. I encourage others who are interested to contact them. If they get flooded with requests, they may take it more seriously... I will post back if I get any replies! The response I got back from WotC was boilerplate text: I hope I'm wrong, but I doubt a real human being even read my request. Forwarding it "to the appropriate teams for review" is probably a euphemism for sending it to the trash folder. Still no reply from OneBookshelf.com customer service. Will keep you posted...
|
|
|
Post by krusader74 on Dec 11, 2016 15:48:22 GMT -6
I have sent an email to Wizards of the Coast via their web interface requesting that they sell Chainmail again... Still no reply from OneBookshelf.com customer service. Will keep you posted... Just got this reply from OneBookshelf: Meanwhile, WotC asked me to take a survey to see if I was happy with their reply...
|
|
|
Post by MormonYoYoMan on Dec 11, 2016 22:56:29 GMT -6
Software talking to software. That it came to pass in my lifetime...
|
|
|
Post by xerxez on Dec 13, 2016 20:54:35 GMT -6
"By Crom's Hairy Nutsack"--consider your idiom stolen Gronan. Unless you have trademarked or copyrighted it.
|
|
|
Post by mrmanowar on Dec 13, 2016 22:58:18 GMT -6
Gronan's idiom is his own, especially when a potent IPA is lifted to enunciate the point.
|
|
|
Post by DungeonDevil on Dec 14, 2016 16:19:20 GMT -6
I'd also write to Wi$bros, but it would be more productive to chat with a brick wall than expect genuine communication with a monolithic corporation. The mega-entity of a corporation does not acknowledge the existence of such a creature as a human being -- or even a considerable number of human beings.
I've already got a PDF that I bought from Drivethru when it was available years ago, so I'm in no need for such, but it would be nice to know that others can buy it thereby swelling the gaming ranks -- if only a little.
|
|
|
Post by xerxez on Dec 14, 2016 19:15:05 GMT -6
Gronan's idiom is his own, especially when a potent IPA is lifted to enunciate the point. Anything Sierra Nevada, particularly Torpedo, or my personal favourite brew of all time, Bridgeport Hop Czar. A little less bitter than Guinness, hop-hop-hoppy, autumn leaf amber colored, and at 7.5 % AC it is most efficacious. Also, I've never seen it for above a ten-spot. It's one you can take to a game, share a couple and still know you have had a few.
|
|
|
Post by foxroe on Dec 14, 2016 19:42:11 GMT -6
Gronan's idiom is his own, especially when a potent IPA is lifted to enunciate the point. Anything Sierra Nevada, particularly Torpedo, or my personal favourite brew of all time, Bridgeport Hop Czar. A little less bitter than Guinness, hop-hop-hoppy, autumn leaf amber colored, and at 7.5 % AC it is most efficacious. Also, I've never seen it for above a ten-spot. It's one you can take to a game, share a couple and still know you have had a few. And here I was thinking IPA = Intellectual Property Attorney.
|
|
|
Post by jcstephens on Jan 7, 2017 15:57:16 GMT -6
Update: Drivethru just updated the Chainmail PDF for those who've already purchased it. Maybe new purchases will soon be allowed?
|
|
|
Post by Zenopus on Jan 7, 2017 17:37:12 GMT -6
Yes, that's an encouraging sign! I believe the same type of activity was noticed just before they started selling old school pdfs again.
|
|