Post by Frederic Bourgault-Christie on May 30, 2006 14:32:32 GMT -5
So this is a difficult thing for me to navigate, given my own complex views on the topic of intellectual property and so on. Nonetheless, as a group of individuals voluntarily coming together and sharing administrative duties, a real paean to practical Internet democracy, I think it's important that I declare at least an initial policy regarding copyrights and see what you guys have to add or subtract.
First of all: Existing source material from other games, movies, TV shows, etc. is obviously not strictly forbidden; a cursory look at the site, including the numerous anime and video game-inspired games, will indicate this. However, I think it does behoove GMs to demarcate clearly what is their concept and what is a concept borrowed from another source. Obviously, existing roleplaying games, such as WotC, Palladium or White Wolf titles (not in order of importance
), are also allowed.
However, now we get into the stickier issue. There are also unique concepts created by people here, whether they be characters (ESPECIALLY characters), classes, equipment or weaponry or technology, game rules and sheets, etc. For the purpose of this site, consultation when these ideas are used by a person aside from the original inventor(s) of the idea will be required.
Why is this policy justified at all? Well, there are at least a few reasons why someone would want their intellectual creations to not be used willy-nilly. Some of them only make sense in a given context, or only have their true depth when written by a given person. I don't think anyone else could write Tyrant, or Thrash, or Quion, or Bombardi's lines; I would thus at least prefer to be the person playing those characters. (Would I be against someone writing material within the FB/CotG universe? Absolutely not: I believe that the healthiest continuities are ones where there is a holistic interaction between fan and author). Some of them represent such an investment in time or ingenuity that the author doesn't want them easily taken. And yes, maybe selfishness might be a motive in some of these cases. In any respect, the reasons behind the decision are irrelevant for these proceedings, though I or the adjudicator in question may ask why the complaint is being lodged.
So the standard I use is fairly simple, and the basic legal standard for copyright disputes: If one person alleges that another took a concept and wants anything from credit to the immediate cessation of use of the concept, any admin(s) on the site can be used as an intermediary or arbiter (obviously aside from any of the people involved in the dispute). Whether over PM, in the offending thread, or in a General Board or GM Chat (this will be chosen by the parties), the accuser will FIRST outline her original idea and explain why she feels the other party has taken the idea. The defending party will then either admit this is the case or defend themselves as they see fit. The arbiter will evaluate the evidence. If the idea is identical to or superficially dissimilar from the original idea, then the arbiter will rule in favor of the accuser; if the idea is determined to be either inspired by but distinct from or of independent origin, then the defendant will be ruled in favor. The arbiter will take, on suggestion, the demand of the accusing party (whether it be a simple request for acknowledgment or a request that the idea not be used), but can be free to propose alternative difficulties. If the solution reached by the arbiter is not satisfactory, appeals can be made to other admins, including myself (assuming I am not the original arbiter). One solution I prefer to do is to alter the offending "stolen" idea to more closely fit the game in question: This lets the defendant preserve what they wanted to do, indeed more authentically, while also giving credit where credit is due.
Of course, this process doesn't have to be used if parties agree to arrange the dispute out of "court".
This may sound excessively legalistic, but I just feel that it is better when people feel they can get appropriate credit for their ideas. It also prevents the proliferation of copycats (like the Virus 37 copies that emerged willy-nilly or the PS/RPG Project ripoffs). Let's all be reasonable, shall we?
Every GM can post their own personal policies on the topic here. As for myself:
Just consult me. I will not only allow most concepts to be used in stories (given accreditation), games, etc. but will even provide assistance as to how to more holistically incorporate it!
First of all: Existing source material from other games, movies, TV shows, etc. is obviously not strictly forbidden; a cursory look at the site, including the numerous anime and video game-inspired games, will indicate this. However, I think it does behoove GMs to demarcate clearly what is their concept and what is a concept borrowed from another source. Obviously, existing roleplaying games, such as WotC, Palladium or White Wolf titles (not in order of importance
), are also allowed.However, now we get into the stickier issue. There are also unique concepts created by people here, whether they be characters (ESPECIALLY characters), classes, equipment or weaponry or technology, game rules and sheets, etc. For the purpose of this site, consultation when these ideas are used by a person aside from the original inventor(s) of the idea will be required.
Why is this policy justified at all? Well, there are at least a few reasons why someone would want their intellectual creations to not be used willy-nilly. Some of them only make sense in a given context, or only have their true depth when written by a given person. I don't think anyone else could write Tyrant, or Thrash, or Quion, or Bombardi's lines; I would thus at least prefer to be the person playing those characters. (Would I be against someone writing material within the FB/CotG universe? Absolutely not: I believe that the healthiest continuities are ones where there is a holistic interaction between fan and author). Some of them represent such an investment in time or ingenuity that the author doesn't want them easily taken. And yes, maybe selfishness might be a motive in some of these cases. In any respect, the reasons behind the decision are irrelevant for these proceedings, though I or the adjudicator in question may ask why the complaint is being lodged.
So the standard I use is fairly simple, and the basic legal standard for copyright disputes: If one person alleges that another took a concept and wants anything from credit to the immediate cessation of use of the concept, any admin(s) on the site can be used as an intermediary or arbiter (obviously aside from any of the people involved in the dispute). Whether over PM, in the offending thread, or in a General Board or GM Chat (this will be chosen by the parties), the accuser will FIRST outline her original idea and explain why she feels the other party has taken the idea. The defending party will then either admit this is the case or defend themselves as they see fit. The arbiter will evaluate the evidence. If the idea is identical to or superficially dissimilar from the original idea, then the arbiter will rule in favor of the accuser; if the idea is determined to be either inspired by but distinct from or of independent origin, then the defendant will be ruled in favor. The arbiter will take, on suggestion, the demand of the accusing party (whether it be a simple request for acknowledgment or a request that the idea not be used), but can be free to propose alternative difficulties. If the solution reached by the arbiter is not satisfactory, appeals can be made to other admins, including myself (assuming I am not the original arbiter). One solution I prefer to do is to alter the offending "stolen" idea to more closely fit the game in question: This lets the defendant preserve what they wanted to do, indeed more authentically, while also giving credit where credit is due.
Of course, this process doesn't have to be used if parties agree to arrange the dispute out of "court".
This may sound excessively legalistic, but I just feel that it is better when people feel they can get appropriate credit for their ideas. It also prevents the proliferation of copycats (like the Virus 37 copies that emerged willy-nilly or the PS/RPG Project ripoffs). Let's all be reasonable, shall we?
Every GM can post their own personal policies on the topic here. As for myself:
Just consult me. I will not only allow most concepts to be used in stories (given accreditation), games, etc. but will even provide assistance as to how to more holistically incorporate it!