Sidetrack copyright conversation (on distributing rulesets)

[Ged]

Although, i'm pretty sure i have seen some posts about downloading rule sets, so apparently some people are doing it anyway. big surprise!

the program sounds cool, but at the same time, it seems sort of dopey that you either have to use the system they give you, or totally make up your own stuff. Perhaps in the future the developers might consider working something out with wizards of the coast, white wolf, and/or some of the other more popular game systems out there. this way, you could pay a fee to get those rule systems, and the company who originated that system would get royalties or some % of profits. Seems to me this would be win-win for everyone - consumers can pay for it if they want to, the devs of FG make more $$$ and the game system companies make more $$$.
These two paragraphs summarise pretty well the two aspects of the issue. If these "some people" want to thrash the expectations of others to get other popular game systems for Fantasy Grounds, stealing (downloading/distributing) content is a way. Creating stuff for one's own use is thus, unfortunately 'cos it makes little sense to invent the wheel so many times, the only option prior to actually aquiring the rights to distribute the ruleset. Therefore, I disapprove (and if required disintegrate!) the kind of posts/threads where every other sentence hints, [sic] wink, wink, at copyright fraud. Rendedring FG a vehicle of illegal content is the worst signal towards this industry.

Further, using these boards requires the acceptance of the rules, which forbid all illegalities. And please respect also the more explicit rules on distributing content in here (https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3464).:ogre:

But to return to your comments :), the kind of development hoped for in the post is happening and though not all are willing (or capable of due to prior licensing agreements), there is much interest towards enabling rulesystems for Fantasy Grounds.

[Oberoten]

If nothing else, I suppose there could be the option of asking for the right to character-sheets for different systems. I can hardly see them disagree about getting more players.

[Griogre]

If nothing else, I suppose there could be the option of asking for the right to character-sheets for different systems. I can hardly see them disagree about getting more players.
I think Oberoten may be on to something with this - even companies not willing to allow a full ruleset may be willing to allow just the character sheet.

[Ged]

I think Oberoten may be on to something with this - even companies not willing to allow a full ruleset may be willing to allow just the character sheet.
I wouldn't be surprised if that is true. Something where different publishers' opinions may vary is the use of their character sheet graphics: some might like it being used, with permission (promotes awareness of the game system), while others may disallow it since it makes the property hard to manage. Asking has rarely hurt anyone really... ;)

[Ged]

This line of discussion is likely to bring up the question on whether making just the character sheet for a gamesystem is ok or not (or as Snikle put it, CSR that is Character Sheet Ruleset). I don't know. A further complication here is that we do not live just by the laws of Finland or the US - in US, for instance, the rules of the game cannot be protected by copyright - not meaning that the text, images etc. wouldn't be. As a side note however, when using the d20 license we give up some rights we would otherwise have (such as resolving success or failure based on the SRD rules) to gain other rights, most importantly to communicate that the ruleset is for d20 games.

To create a CSR from the template provided by the property owner clearly violates their rights, if this is done without permission. And I personally feel that compiling the same information to another format is not much different from ordering the chapters of a textbook to another order - plagiarism. But a copyright lawyer might think otherwise: the amount of information is so small and consists of putting together obvious pieces of game rules book-keeping items that there are only so many ways to do it reasonably...

Asking for a permission (success might require a reasonable argument for mutual benefit ;)) is the way to go. We cannot have it otherwise here.

[Thore_Ironrock]

If nothing else, I suppose there could be the option of asking for the right to character-sheets for different systems. I can hardly see them disagree about getting more players.

If I may ...

A character sheet is considered to be a "vehicle" for a publisher's rules in the RPG industry, and 99% of the companies out there are not going to be overly concerned about it's reproduction. That is why you see things like "Permission to photocopy" at the bottom. That is the "overall" rule regarding character sheets.

Now ... to get more specific ...

Since the "dawn" of the Internet, and especially since the onset of the SRD/OGL agreement, copyright infringement has taken a sharper turn in the RPG world, and as a result people have become more concerned about it. However, the basic legal principals regarding the character sheet have, in my opinion, not changed much if at all. Remember that a character sheet is a vehicle to represent the rules ... not the rules themselves. On the other hand, if a character sheet had specific rules "built into it", then that would be a potential problem since that intellectual property is own by someone else and not yourself.

To be more specific ... if your a DM and you've bought your favorite campaign to run, you can copy the character sheet in the back of the book to give to your players. That basic concept hasn't changed since the advent of gaming. I believe the same can be said for Fantasy Grounds. A publisher will assume you've bought their product if you duplicate their character sheet, and if said sheet goes to others that only "play" then they (publishers) are fine with that. If they weren't, places like RPGSheets (www.rpgsheets.com) would have been shut down a long time ago.

In other words, it's all about money. Publishers are in business to make money, plain and simple. They are able to continue to produce your favorite gaming system because you spend the money to purchase their products, whether they are electronic or not. A publisher lives and dies by the number of sales they can make, and if that number is reduced by copyright infringement then eventually a publisher can no longer afford to put out products. This is a wide generalzation of course, but the logic hold true nonetheless. Personally I don't know of any company that has "folded" because of copyright infringement, but I can tell you many of my friends in the publishing world believe it has effected them in some way.

I was asked the "copyright/ruleset" question a lot at Gen Con, and my standard response was: "We only ask that if you have the ability to build your own ruleset from published material that you respect the publisher's copyrights and not distribute the material."." Not one person disagreed with me. When explaining "rulesets" to people, I also mentioned that technically all you need is a character sheet, and that a ruleset was nothing more than an online reference for the rules. I would hazard a guess that most people play FG with a rules book sitting right next to them, and that was comment I heard from a lot of people who said they had no programming skills.

Personally, I LOVE this idea of a character sheet only ruleset. Outside of what I mentioned above, the only other thing I would like to mention is to remember that art and logos are copyrighted materials too. Companies pay "very" large amounts of money for art, and while we like to "make things pretty" when it comes to our FG games, please keep this fact in mind. To me, it is more important that a character sheet be "functional" than pretty.

My two galleons folks ...

[Oberoten]

One thing that I'd love to see is a separate folder for stashing character sheets...

So that you could have different designs for different roles etc. Unecessary I know but it'd add to the whole "Your normal RPG desktop in cyberspace" feel. ;)

... now I need to make a new desktop texture with coca-cola spills and semi-crushed minis on it. And candy... lots and lots of candy. That'd get closer to how things look when we actually RP.

[kalmarjan]

Or if we could make the character sheet start to "erase through" when we make changes to it. LOL

Sandeman

[greymage001]

MY take is since we all own the books for whichever game we are going to play. putting the character sheet in fantasy grounds wouldnt be an infringement if you own the materials.

[Illrigger]

MY take is since we all own the books for whichever game we are going to play. putting the character sheet in fantasy grounds wouldnt be an infringement if you own the materials.
For your own use, you can do whatever you want. For distribution, that's a different matter.

For the record, while you own the physical copy of a book, you DON'T own the CONTENTS OF the book. That remains the intellectual property of the authors and/or publishers. A printed copy of a book is more or less a license to use the materials in the book by the person in possession of it. If you were to scan the contents of the book into a PDF file, that would be fine under the Fair Use rights act; however if give a copy said PDF to a friend without also giving him the original, that would be illegal.

In the same vein, making electronic copies of character sheets is similarly illegal if you were to give them out to your friends. That being said, it's entirely up to the copyright holder how they handle these things. There are plenty of character sheets out there on the internet and for the most part publishers let them go because it doesn't really hurt their sales.

[Snikle]

I would like to see a removal of the character sheet from the ruleset, sort of how the modules are set up. A seperate folder you put them into, and the GM can then select which ones are available to the players that connect. (would like the same for the rulesets as well, versus being an integral part of the system as the seem to be now).
I agree with Thore that the character sheets (so long as we made them from scratch and didnt simply scan in the ones in the book) would only serve as a vehicle to more people being introduced to the game...and hence have the support of the publishers.
I see splitting the character sheet and the ruleset as a huge improvement in the way FG is set up. Additionally, we could probably throw 75% of the copyright discussions on this forum out the window.

[Ged]

I would like to see a removal of the character sheet from the ruleset, sort of how the modules are set up.
We have been working on it and a mechanic for this will indeed be provided. The implementation works the other way round, the character sheet, NPC sheets etc. are in the ruleset and the reference material can be contained in modules. The default ruleset will be structured this way, so it'll be easy to grasp. :)

[Snikle]

Sweet! Glad to hear.


(or as Snikle put it, CSR that is Character Sheet Ruleset).

Whooohooo! I think I coined a new term for the industry!

[cantrels]

Well, here's where my concern/questions come in.

I've created a Star Wars D20 ruleset that I use in my campaign. Clearly, this is copyrighted material and as such I will never post it to the forums, etc.

But...anyone that connects to my server as a player is downloaded a copy of this ruleset. And that's just how FG works. So regardless of my "personal use" etc intentions...that ruleset is "distributed" merely by the use of the software.

So how does that figure into all this?

[Ged]

Rulesets will be cached so that they are not playable without a GM who has the ruleset. Therefore they do not spread anymore by just connecting to a host.

Modules will be by default only for the GM and the fact that reference information can be included in modules does not change that. "By default" implies there are other possibilities too: in fact the modules of v2 may include host data, shared data and client data. Host data is only for the GM, the GM can allow the players to receive shared data, and client data is contained in modules clients have and the players may request for the GM to allow enabling them (the GM can naturally access his/her own client data).

The shared data are also cached and do not become available for the players outside the game session.

Hope this answered your question.

(the names given for the types of module data are subject to change)

[bobthebuilder]

Originally Posted by mf2
the program sounds cool, but at the same time, it seems sort of dopey that you either have to use the system they give you, or totally make up your own stuff.

I am inclined to agree with this.

[Oberoten]

I don't know. I'd say that is the case with most programs really. If you don't like what they are delivered with you get to change it so it suits you.

That aside, there has been some mention of aproaching other gaming companies so mayhap we will see other systems as plugins soon enough.

[kalmarjan]

I am inclined to agree with this.

Hmmm. Not sure why. The issue is with licensing and the freedom to use FG with anything that you can accomplish. If FG was offered with, say CoC, then it stands to reason that with everything built into it, you could not use it for another game, like Champions.

FG was never meant to be an online [insert game company name here] player. It is meant to emulate Tabletop play.

Right now it sucks that you may not have every ruleset out there available for purchase, but bide your time. Seems the RPG industry moves about as fast as it would take to handwrite a WOTC handbook. Things are coming, it just takes time.

This year has seen an AE ruleset, an IH ruleset, and several adventures coming out since then.

The year is not even over yet, and once 2.0 comes out, I expect that you will see the whole ruleset expansion of FG explode.

Hope that soothes,

Sandeman

[tdwyer11b]

We have been working on it and a mechanic for this will indeed be provided. The implementation works the other way round, the character sheet, NPC sheets etc. are in the ruleset and the reference material can be contained in modules. The default ruleset will be structured this way, so it'll be easy to grasp. :)

So does this mean rules reference material can be created like a module as in the current version, or will we have to continue to create them with XML?

[Natai]

I am a publsher planning to release a pen & paper RPG called Proteus: Second Edition in January. I am new to FG and have not started using it yet, though I plan to in the very near future. I have a couple of thoughts on all this.

First, in my opinion a publisher that does not allow players to create and distribute a ruleset for their products and yet refuses to create one for their own distribution is missing out on a large market. If they created their own, they could simply sell it as another product. At the very least they could create a Lite version that would still be valuable reference material for FG without giving up too much of the product.

Second, including FG rulesets or adventures with roleplaying products would be an excellent selling point that would set those products apart from their competitors.

Third, as a publisher I intend to create a complete ruleset for Proteus. If I understand correctly, this can include changing the appearance of the FG program. This would provide a nice sense of atmosphere for the game as well as a good selling point. If I get a decent response, I plan to also provide FG versions of adventures with every adventure I release. As long as a player-created ruleset doesn't provide so much material that others have no need to purchase the actual game, more power to them. More importantly, I am trying to place a lot of emphasis on getting players involved in the ongoing development of the game. So any improvements players make on existing rulesets I would be glad to help them distribute. My goal is to create a large community of players for my game, so if something a player creates helps that along, I want to support it.