Misconception in TOS and Discord Mod Abuse?

[Ineffable_DM]

Hello,
I am one of the GM's from the Fantasy Grounds Gaming Lounge and I have recently wanted to get more into developing extensions for some rulesets that lack certain features. I have taken to using AI to do this. I did my homework on the Terms of Service for Fantasy Grounds and I have been operating under the assumption that reading/referencing the rulesets are absolutely fine, even expected.

However, on the discord on of the moderate "Savage Doswelk" @savage_doswelk has threatened to ban me and then when I was calmly and respectfully trying to explain my understanding of the situation he mutes me for 24 hours? Really cool way to have a conversation and maybe figure out what is actually suppose to be going on?

Please see attached image from discord.

He first mentions the PEG AI policy which I also am not violating in anyway (no module information nothing regarding rules, settings etc)

Then he implies i need two of the community developers permission to... i guess read or use their rulesets?

from what I looked at and saw the terms of service allows me to use the rulesets for development as long as i am not coping them into my own extensions (which i am not)

please help.

66031

[LordEntrails]

You really need to talk directly to SmiteWorks. You should reach out to them via the contact links here: https://fantasygroundsunity.atlassian.net/servicedesk/customer/portals

If that doesn't work (do understand its the holidays and a weekend may take them a business day or two to respond) reach out to me via DM and I will work to help get you in contact with teh right folks.

[Ineffable_DM]

Thanks, I sent the email. It is not urgent I just want to make sure that I am not actually mistaken and that other people are not meeting this kind of unwelcoming attitude, regardless of being mistaken or not unwelcoming is unwelcoming and that is not what Fantasy Grounds is about.

[LordEntrails]

I do have to admit, your screen shot got me riled up, so I did some research. Figured I should capture it here so the next person doesn't have to do such, or will find it easier to do so in the future.
From the https://discord.com/channels/274582899045695488/274634463860883458 channel.

Looks like maybe things started Dec 19th, (-7UTC)

66032
irrelevant stuff not captured.
66033

66034
66035

Then the screenshot posted in the OP

[Ineffable_DM]

yes that is correct, the whole thing is kind of a long a sordid affair.

I will admit that my reaction on the rob2e discord server was not the best. However honestly that and how Doswelk a mod and community developer is treating people not the same issue. I will cover it just so we have a clean background but it is side to the ToS issue. I do not want to sell a portals extension out the gate. I want to start with that. I want to give freaking Diablobob a working version of portals that fixes the broken ui changes. That is all. He is just impossible to get ahold of to make this happen. I asked Jiminimonka what to do and he told me to basically quit nothing I was doing was worth anything because I used AI and I lost my temper said what I said and left. I attached a better pic of the conversation on regarding portals.

I wanted to just give it to them you can see right at the top please just update the ext so the community can use it??????

anyway jiminimonka has basically just been hostile and rude to everything I have said as well as the mute from Doswelk I am just like please be nice? what is even happening.

also would like to note the ext i am putting on forge atm is -not- portals or related to portals in anyway.


66036

[Trenloe]

Unfortunately, the use of AI polarizes opinion for a lot of people and so discussion of any use can get quite heated. As with the use of any IP (AI or otherwise), the potential use of AI within Fantasy Grounds products should respect the wishes of all the IP owners involved.

Regarding uploading ruleset and extension code to an AI system: SmiteWorks has a pretty open view on the use of Generative AI within Fantasy Grounds - detailed here: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?80634-SmiteWorks-Statement-on-the-use-of-Generative-AI-within-Fantasy-Grounds But the overriding factor for Savage Worlds material has a very limited use within AI - including not uploading any PEG Inc material to external AI systems, as detailed here: https://peginc.com/faq-items/ai-fileshare-prohibition-policy/ @Ineffable_DM - thanks for removing the sharing of your AI model details in the FG Discord channel, I don't know if you can also remove the data uploaded to the AI system?

Regarding using the FG code of someone else: please review the license/sharing information provided by the developer/IP owner of all code involved. If there are no specific details provided, the assumption is that the code is copyright to the owner - and you need to ask their permission to use their code, even if most of that code is being replaced. @Ineffable_DM - thanks for removing your code based on the extension of someone else.

Regarding using an AI model to create FG code that's shared publicly (no matter if it's free): as long as the code/data used to create the AI model and resulting code is allowed to be used in such a way, then that's fine. Obviously, this relies on a lot of honesty as only the person who creates the code using AI will really know what's been used. Others can probably have a good guess if the code's been created using AI, but there's no way of knowing how that code was created (i.e. what model, what code was used to train the model, etc.). In an ideal world, whoever uses AI to create code should be aware of what's being used to create that code, how similar that created code is to existing code, and what permission they need to release that code publicly - but I would imagine the chances of this level of due diligence occurring are low, so use of AI to generate publicly shared code should be used with care and the wishes of IP owners respected.

[Ineffable_DM]

"thanks for removing the sharing of your AI model details in the FG Discord channel, I don't know if you can also remove the data uploaded to the AI system?"

There was never any prohibited PEG information uploaded to the ai system that was shared. The only information the system had was an overview of the corerpg ruleset and how it related to the savage worlds ruleset and a general best practices information document of my own making. Which seems like would have been allowed via your response in "Regarding using an ai model to create fg code" response.

Regarding using the FG code of someone else: please review the license/sharing information provided by the developer/IP owner of all code involved. If there are no specific details provided, the assumption is that the code is copyright to the owner - and you need to ask their permission to use their code, even if most of that code is being replaced. @Ineffable_DM - thanks for removing your code based on the extension of someone else.

I never shared any code or extension based on the work of anyone else. The AI model reads the code but does not change or replicate it at all and again the model is contained to only the ruleset file information. I am making entirely new extensions that do new things that no other extensions do. Doswelk is adamant I am not allowed to read his code or the other dev's without his permission more or less (using ai to read it as a tool in this instance)


Regarding using an AI model to create FG code that's shared publicly: as long as the code/data used to create the AI model is allowed to be used in such a way, then that's totally fine. Obviously, this relies on a lot of honesty as only the person who creates the code using AI will really know what's been used. Others can probably have a good guess if the code's been created using AI, but there's no way of knowing how that code was created (i.e. what model, what code was used to train the model, etc.). In an ideal world, whoever uses AI to create code should be aware of what's being used to create that code, how similar that created code is to existing code, and what permission they need to release that code publicly - but I would imagine the chances of this level of due diligence occurring are low.

Thank you for clarify I did not think I had misinterpreted the terms of service and this is all I have done until now. My AI model reads the rulesets does not copy or duplicate any code there and then uses that information to make a new extension to do whatever i desire the result to be. I am not even interested in sharing a public model I am interested in showing people how to make their own and how AI thinks to maximize their ability to make their own, while also operating my own private model to expand Fantasy Grounds.

[Trenloe]

I never shared any code or extension based on the work of anyone else. The AI model reads the code but does not change or replicate it at all.
If you're using someone else's code to train an LLM, you can't guarantee that the AI model isn't replicating that code in some way - that's not how AI coding models work, otherwise you'd get code that isn't based on the code you're training with - which would negate the whole purpose of training the LLM with the code in the first place! If you're injecting any code into an LLM, then that code is being used in some way - even if the resulting code doesn't appear, at first glance, to be the same/similar. Bottom line - only inject code into an LLM that you have full rights to use in that way.

[Ineffable_DM]

You’re conflating training an LLM with using an LLM as a runtime tool. I am not training a model on anyone else’s code. No model weights are being modified, and no proprietary code is being absorbed into a training corpus.

I am using an existing LLM as a coding assistant, the same way a developer might read documentation or inspect a local file to understand an API. The ruleset files are provided temporarily as reference so the model can reason about structure and hooks. They are not redistributed, embedded, or reproduced.

This is functionally equivalent to a human developer opening CoreRPG and Savage Worlds files locally to see how a character sheet works, then writing original extension code that calls existing interfaces. Fantasy Grounds explicitly supports extensions that layer new behavior on top of rulesets without copying them.

No third party code is being shared, no proprietary files are included in the output, and no derivative work is being produced. The output consists solely of original XML and Lua written to add new functionality.

Training restrictions are not applicable here. This is permitted personal use, not redistribution, not model training, and not reuse of protected source.

and yes I used and ai to explain this because my words seem to fall short, this is directly from the terms of service.

[Trenloe]

This is where opinions are divided - uploading data to an AI (whether it's perceived as "training" an LLM or providing data to an existing LLM specific to a question) is quite different to a human looking at code and producing their own code.

In other posts you've said you've uploaded CoreRPG, SavageWorlds and DCC ruleset code, plus extension code as well. With that in mind, the following statement isn't true - there is no way that code produced in the manner you've outlined is original or non-derivative:

No third party code is being shared, no proprietary files are included in the output, and no derivative work is being produced. The output consists solely of original XML and Lua written to add new functionality.

[Ineffable_DM]

I understand there are differing comfort levels around AI tools, but those concerns do not alter the legal definition of a derivative work. Under the Fantasy Grounds terms, the line is copying and redistribution, not dependency or tooling and everything I have done is allowed.

and that also does not give a pass to how Doswelk and Jiminimonka present their selves even if they really really don't like it.

[Doswelk]

I am closing this thread as I think you will find you can post and are not in any way banned or timed out.

I had a number of complaints about you, so I checked your account, and I clicked time out, which I reversed almost immediately when I realised I had done this in error, as the complaints were unjustified

I am not getting invloved any further in this disussion, whilst your attitude can come across as abrasive i do not think that you are in any way trying to be toxic.

Therefore I am ignoring any requests I ghot to ban and the less polite I descriptions I have got about you, as I do not have the time to get involved more than I have already stated on the Discord.

[ddavison]

I am posting this response based on my understanding of intellectual property law. I am not a lawyer, laws vary by jurisdiction, and legal frameworks around AI are still evolving.

1. Distribution vs. Ownership

A creator of intellectual property (IP) may choose to distribute their work for free or for a fee.
Distributing IP for free does not, by itself, grant others the right to redistribute, modify, or incorporate that IP into other works without permission.

2. Public Domain vs. Free Distribution

IP may be explicitly released into the public domain, which allows anyone to use, modify, and redistribute it without restriction.
This is legally distinct from distributing something for free, which retains full copyright ownership unless explicitly waived.

3. Game Mechanics vs. Expression

Game mechanics themselves are not copyrightable.
However, the expression of those mechanics-including written rules text, code implementations, UI layout, art, naming, and structure-is protected intellectual property.

4. Visibility vs. Access Control in Fantasy Grounds

Fantasy Grounds rulesets and extensions may be delivered either:


Outside the vault (clear-text, readable Lua/XML inside .pak or .ext files), or
Inside the vault (encrypted .dat files that are not human-readable).


The creator controls which delivery method is used.

5. Technical Readability

Content delivered outside the vault is technically readable and referenceable by users and tools.

This is a statement of technical reality, not permission.

6. No AI-Specific Controls

Fantasy Grounds does not provide a technical mechanism to mark content as readable by humans but not by AI or other external tools.

7. SmiteWorks Platform Policy

SmiteWorks allows community developers to create new works, modifications, or extensions for Fantasy Grounds.
These may be used personally or distributed via the Fantasy Grounds Forge as free or paid content, subject to Forge policies and applicable law.

8. Reading does not equal Reuse

Publishing code outside the vault allows others to read and reference it for learning purposes.
It does not grant permission to copy, reuse, modify, or redistribute any portion of that code in new or altered works unless explicit permission or a license allows it.

Separate from legal considerations, there is also a strong human and community element. Fantasy Grounds exists because of passionate community developers - some building commercial products, others contributing freely for the benefit of players. When working with or learning from others' code, a good community developer should err on the side of respect, caution, and communication. If in doubt, ask permission. Respecting the wishes of fellow developers helps maintain trust, collaboration, and a healthy ecosystem for everyone.


TLDR:
SmiteWorks Policy:
Using AI to reverse engineer or recreate another developer’s extension for redistribution or sale is not permitted without explicit permission or a compatible license. AI does not change copyright rules or community expectations. Reading code is allowed; reusing or deriving from it is not. Responsibility for AI-assisted output rests with the developer using the tool.