Not sure what 'IP' is, but already a good portion of their stuff can be copied and distributed for free.  It's Fair Use act.

I'm kinda confused why people are fighting now.

Jase suggested allowing the OPTION of making stuff CC or not.  He never indicated what would be the default, or how it would be implemented, he simply said he would code in that option so people could use it.  He's since retracted that plan, and has decided to simply put a few definitions in, saying if you see 'CC' in a game, this is what it means.  Everything will continue to be copyrighted by default.  Life will go on, your novels, maps and adventures are still as safe as they were before (which, all told, isn't saying a whole lot).

A lot of people have expressed some reasonable concerns over the concept, but I think some people took the idea and ran.  Jase never indicated that CC would be the default, he never indicated that it would carry-over to previous posts, he never even indicated how easy it would be to change back and forth!  Yet people responded like he was personally breaking into their homes and kidnapping their children.

Alright, rant is done, we've all made our points, and non-CC has won.  I think it's time to close this all up and remind Jase that we all appreciate him and his wonderful crew, even if we don't always agree with him (and maybe even make up with each other, even though some people, like me, are mean and nasty ; P ).

  IP - "Intelectual Property".


 Ah, yes, "fair use" - one of the least understood and most abused /misapplied exceptions to Copyright.  "Fair Use" is actually very limited.


  Beg to differ:

  Emphasis is, of course, mine.  Clearly, the original intent was to institute the liscense RPOL-wide, as the default status - and it is that default status to which I objected.


  No, more like taking the locks off our doors, so that othes could more readily break in and steal our TV sets or stereos (figuratively speaking, and to make a more apt analogy).
This message was last edited by the user at 02:16, Sun 26 Sept 2004.

I really don't think it's helpful to continue to argue about the relative merits of C or CC, when it's already been established that we can't all come to an agreement on the matter, and Jase has proposed a solution which would allow you to retain your full copyright.



Neither is it helpful to accuse Jase of having changed the rules mid-game. All he's ever done is pose the question. Sure, he plead his case strongly, just as you're continuing to do so. But for people to then assume that he wouldn't wait for the outcome of the discussion- in spite of the fact he instituted it, and in spite of his track record as far as listening to memebers of the site goes- was dissapointing, and it's understandable that he should be upset.



One of Jase's complaints about people's handling of this discussion was that noone bothered to ask him just what his benchmark for implementation was. A number of people have suggested that he would have automatically applied CC to RPoL retrospectively.  Have you asked him? I'm not so sure he even could, since the license is probably dated, as legal documents tend to be. The point is moot however because CC is not going to be implemented as a blanket default.

That dead horse has had enough of a flogging. It's starting to smell. How 'bout we put it to rest, eh?

  I am terribly sorry that I didn't overdo the future-tense of that statement; I thought "the prospect of" was sufficient.  Apparently it was not.


  Less broad strokes there, please.  I never made such an assumption - and a reasonable reading of my posts won't show any implication of same, either.


  Yes, he could.  And yes, that would be the default presumption for any discussion of such a change inpolicy.  Despite all the people talking about prior posts, too - I don't see jase once indicating that the new CCL would not be HAVE BEEN applied retroactively.  Do you?

_{edit: gotta be REEEEEEAAAAAAAAALLLLLLL careful about those tenses ... *sigh*}
This message was last edited by the user at 02:33, Sun 26 Sept 2004.

Don't you think you've scolded me enough for something I'm not going to implement because I've listened to peoples opinions?

You should all feel lucky that Jase has more patients in times like this that I would have.

Maybe its time to end the arguments over a moot point by closing this thread.

???

yeah. At this point, the argument is over how people responded to the original question, and has little to do with the original topic.  (my own biased opinion)

  I'm not scolding you, jase.  Seriously, man.  I've just been expressing my opinion on things - as strongly as I feel those opinions.  And the quote of you above was in response to vetch, anyway.

  The only thing I'm upset about in any way,now, is the less-than-happy light that pro-copyright folks have been painted in - largely because that includes me.  I don't think wanting to make my own decisions about copyright-or-CC makes me anti-community, for example.  And it still baffles me that you truly cannot seem to imagine why someone would choose full copyright over a CCL.

  What I'd like to do is explain why it's so important to me to preserve the copyright-default status here.  So, here's an example for you: I'm working ona couple ideas for game settings using d20 rules, which involve some fairly extensive work.  I plan, if they go over well, to look into publishing them under the OGL.  The trick is ... "go over well" will mean running a trial game or two in each setting, right here on RPOL.  Thus, copyright becomes a critical issue for me.

 The CCL you initially proposed, btw, would allow for derivative works, fully liscensed.  Which would mean, everything in those settings, if ever present on RPOL, would have to be declared Open Game Content - noneof it could be retained as Product Identity, because there'd already be a blanket liscense to use them in any derivative fashion they liked.  That's not something that would fit in at all well with my own plans for those settings.

  That is why I objected to CC as the default status, and why I prefer to keep full copyright as the default state.  In essence, I wanted to keep things defaulted to the strictest, most-protected state possible ... and have the option to *choose* to enter a more-open state.  ^_^

  Seriously; some of my stuff, I think CC is perfectly suited for.  Those arena maps, for example.  And I'd love to see some CC-based icons made available, and a place to display 'em, for those games which aren't something I want to retain absolute control over.  But I prefer,when not specified, for the protection to be the fullest possible.  That's all.

_{EDIT: argh, damned typo'ed html tags!}
This message was last edited by the user at 03:01, Sun 26 Sept 2004.

Funny. There's been plenty of "pro-copyright" people reply since Jase announced he wasn't going to implement CC. And I don't feel any ill-will towards any of them, I'm not so childish I can't get along with anyone who's opinion is different from mine.

In fact, the only one I've even been slightly annoyed with is you. Perhaps then, it's not that you're "pro-copyright" that has people jumping on your back. Perhaps it's the fact that you just refuse to let it go.

Yes, I aware I'm being hypocritical by replying to you, but hey, Jase is a friend of mine, and I don't like to see my friends beaten about the head with longwinded explanations and accusations, all for having the audacity to want to listen to your complaints in the first place.

Let it go.

Now I'm going to post this, and you're almost certainly going to retaliate, so I've already come up with a suitable reply.

*sticks fingers in ears*
"Na na na na.. I'm not listening."
(Jase, you should try it too, it'd make your life a lot easier :P)
This message was last edited by the user at 03:22, Sun 26 Sept 2004.

We could all sit here for weeks, and discuss everyone's personal reasons for objecting or agreeing to the CCL. Point is now, though, that jase has simply said he won't be implementing it based on the vote of the community.

Funny, that. After this "debate" we should start calling this the "RPoL Comm" because I didn't see much unity on the entire issue. Yes, I agree that everyone should have their own personal opinions about the entire issue, but with so many people leaping up in arms ready to declare that they'll leave, or any other number of things in response to the CCL being implemented, I'm quite personally ashamed at that fact.

I'm not really commenting on CCL at the present time, but rather, my disappointment at the fact that everyone here has gotten fired up about a vote on the RPoll regarding whether we think is should be implemented or not.

I'm pro-copyright myself, and I stated that already about it all. However, having come to the very easy realization that I can stipulate that in my game individually, I didn't see any problem in implementing the CCL - even now, just as those who were pro-copyright could have placed an individual disclaimer in their games saying "This isn't free for all." People who are Pro-CCL can now sit there and place a disclaimer in their games saying that it IS under the Creative Commons Licence.

I can understand your point of view, gmpax, in wanting to keep some of your work under full rights to yourself. However, I don't see why you've had to get so fired up about it. Like I said before, when it comes to my games, I prefer them to stay under full copyright because of the potential ideas I have for using those settings and worlds for commercial purposes. The rest of my stuff, though, hell, I'm just a player with one minor part in an entire story. If someone thinks that my writing in another game is worth copying - go for it, as long as they say who I am and that I wrote it, I'd be sincerely honored that they thought my work was worthy of reproduction at another location.

Characters are different. From what I've read (and this might have changed recently given the JK Rowling upset and everything over fanfiction), but I've been led to understand that copyright over a character is a lot different to a copyright work. I'm not sure how far that goes, but I know that if I had a character who's a street thug in LA called John Smith, I'd have a very hard time claiming rights over the intellectual property that is that character, if someone else created a story based on a character called John Smith who's a street thug in LA as well. Whether this would be as black and white with fantasy characters (where so many names are very original) I don't know.

That's my little rant, shutting up now. Whether it makes a poitn or not I don't know - I started writing and then got sidetracked, I think.

EDIT:



I just decided that I like you, vetch. Made me laugh ;)
This message was last edited by the user at 03:23, Sun 26 Sept 2004.

Don't worry Jase, I think RPOL is excellent and while I was pro CCL I can see everyone else point. However, I think that RPOL will always be one of the best sites on the net.

Now I think it's time to drop it and just dedicate this little part of my post to our awesome admin:

For he's a jolly good fellow,
For he's a jolly good fellow,
For he's a jolly good fellow.....!
Which nobody can deny!

;)

Here....Here...

Three cheers for Jase and his winged monkeys....

Hip...hip....HOORAY!
Hip...hip....HOORAY!
Hip...hip....HOORAY!

I'd like to point out something minor.

Instituting something like that would have to be made rather public on the site.  The OGL (used for the SRD and in conjunction with OGC) is INCOMPATIBLE with any other liscense on copyright/usage.

That may not effect anyone not playing something like Dungeons and Dragons, but its just something I wanted to bring as the OGL and such was brought up.

It damned well sounds like it.  Oh and thats not me having a go at you. No. Its just me expressing my opinion  on  your style of writing.  And if this sounds a bit strong -  well tough luck, because thats  because I believe it strongy, and am expressing it strongly.  :)

Jase -  shame about the CC, but there are some real sad, selfish people out there, shame no-one ever taught them to share.  And  again -  thats  not having a go at any of you selfish ones -  its  just  my opinion that I adhere to  strongly, and use  plain language  to express  (a bit like  GMPax  :).

Sometimes I really dislike this  selfish, materialistic society of ours.

BTW -  as on one the Majority that  voted for  CC in the Poll -   I am really upset that you have listened to the MINORITY who  whinged most loudly in here.  remind me to  go back to  being a squeaky wheel,  whinging and whining as loud as I can again, to see if I can get you to liten to me  more.
This message was last edited by the user at 07:47, Sun 26 Sept 2004.

I was refering to everyone who jumped the gun and decided that jase had already made up his mind and would be implimenting this feature, especially targeting those who would "take their bat and ball and go home" as it were.

I have just as much right to voice my opinion and if you think it is out of line then so be it. I can't dictate how you take my comments. But I wholely stand by them.



No disagreement there.



So you are saying (through veiled speach) that we (probably meaning me here) dont respect the community?

Who is being the insensitive commenter now?

So the fact that jase has asked this question, and many others like it is disrespectful?
So the responding to emails at all hours from users with problems that would be solved if they read the FAQs is disrespectful.
And finally the simple fact that every one of the Mods here have sacrificed playing time to help keep this place running at some sort of normalicy. Yep that is disrespectful and plain selfish.

I must correct my ways. I appologise.



It justifies it because that is how I feel.
At the moment I feel like you (and Im being specific here to save any "broad strokes" comments) are disrespecting Jase, this site and all the hard work that has been put into it by not only him, his "helpers" and the community as a whole.

All this Wah! Wah! Wah! about ME ME ME, just sits wrong with me. And that it continues even after a workable compromise in the form of game specific disclaimers just apple struddles me no end.

But like I said before. Obviously I am out of line and I appologise for that. Seems like it is not worth posting my opinions any more so consider this my last.


elSpike out.

Evolution of a discussion continues I guess. :p

First there's the stage of questions and attempts to understand the topic at hand.
Then there's the interesting part where everyone states their views, and it's wide and far ranging.
Then there's a bunch of responses, which leads to even more interesting views being expressed...

...

Then, when everything that can possibly be said has been said, and all the same views are starting to repeat: it degenerates into people taking everything personally, which leads to flame wars. :p


Jase has already told us his final decision. I'd like to make a motion that this thread be closed now, and if anyone else wants to continue they should take it to Community Chat.

Sounds like a good idea, Nerwen. I second that motion. :)

Only 154 people have voted at last check out of 2710 that log in weekly. This issue is already officially dismissed from consideration? Admittedly, I am normally content to play games without worry and rarely check here unless I receive some prodding. Perhaps, a notice that an important issue is under discussion might lead to a few more votes to get a better feel for the actual community feeling?

So why might I be against CC?

*Added complication.

The proposed methods for protection of individual players breeds a degree of complication from an end user’s (guest) standpoint. As a GM, to care for paranoid would be writers in a game ;-) It seems I would have to keep a notice and detail each players preferences and my own. Truth be told, I would rather worry over game issues and simply having fun.

It seems easier just to just opt out with a blanket statement for a game, especially in games with a lot of players. Where is the benefit then? How does this enable or encourage people to share with more ease? If you want people to share why not make it easy for them and make them want to do so? CC does not seem to do that...

*Harvest sharing and goodwill?

To me, CC as an official policy seems to take people out of the equation by allowing some one to borrow things with a nod and wink, never having to speak to the author or creator to actually build that bond. Where is the good will in that? I feel it is more likely to harvest tempers and bad feeling as proposed, simply another issue formalized, for people to argue over.

I often wondered about starting a forum under CC where content authors could drop by and submit things ranging from dungeon maps to adventure modules for other’s free use and receive honest  feedback and “accolades” ;) to actually build that good will and sharing between one another that I read discussed here. I guess it could work at RPOL.

It was an idea people could “opt into” rather than automatically be “pushed” into. “Perception” of being forced into something is more important than the actual truth in such a discussion as this... Too many details seem yet to be presented.

*Clear road map.

The more I read through this thread, the more little quirks and surprises that crop up. Yet, I never actually saw a clear proposal for implementing CC as policy and a description for what it will entail for end users provided in detail “at RPOL.” This appears as simply a broad discussion for CC which I am familiar with. It seems offense was taken due to assumptions being made about methods for implementation with out asking... Well, to help understand this issue and get back on track... I am asking. Please?

*Authority and bickering.

I am personally not interested in the flames or insults and think a few might be better served to step away from things for a day as the debate has lost all focus. I am very thankful to play here and have fun doing so, I come here to play games with all of you and have fun where able. Not to see some of these... “tensions.” ;)

I will admit I am a bit nervous any time such an issue comes up as I can not sit down and have a beer with the people instigating such things, the people with real authority. I am just a guest and have no desire to offend those who make playing here possible. It is about enjoying a hobby and having fun or so I had always thought, and not worrying over legal stuff.

As a guest that is by nature at a distance... is it any surprise, I might worry that the worst is coming to pass when I do not see a clear proposal or roadmap. I might worry over things that seem to be occurring over my head but that does not mean “I think” the worst of you. In truth it is quite the contrary.

Maybe I make a little sense? ;) I hope all of you are having fun gaming.

Well, I reckon that puts an end to that.  It would not be fair to you to reply to your reply if you are not going to reply in return.  I'm done.

  See, this sort of crap is what I see as a very real problem.

  Why must one be selfish, to prefer full copyright as the default?  Why does preferring that default, mean one was never taught to share ...?

  I was taught to share, thank you very much ... and I was also taught not to force other people to "share", because that's not sharing - it's taking.

But obviously not very well.  Actually, yes I believe that those  who insist on fully copyright  for  Games  that they play for fun -  are  being selfish  :)  Unless of course you intend to sell your material?  And then I assume you will give Jase a BIG cut  for putting all the work in to let you develop the game.  If  not -  then  you  would be greedy as well as selfish.

Anmd I obnject to my views being called crap, just because you dont like them.  Seems a shame that YOU can't respect MY opinion :)

Or is it only other people have to respect your opinion?  You don't feel the need to reciprocate?

Sorry gmpax...  the original issue is closed, it isn't going to happen.  If you want to discuss your views on copyright laws in your part of the world, well there's CC.  Sorry, that's Community Chat.
This message was last edited by the user at 17:42, Sun 26 Sept 2004.

... I think we should all just let this die as it's not having the positive impact I had hoped it would, in fact quite a dramatic case of the reverse.

  And apparently you were taught to steal.  *shrug*  That, after all, is what "forcing others to share" tends to turn out to be.


  ROFLMAO.  A big cut?  So, if you write a new gaming product, and test it out at your kitchen table - should the people who built your house get "a BIG cut"?  Should the makers of that table get "a BIG cut"?  Should the people who manufactured, packaged, and distributed the assorted soda and snacks consumed get "a BIG cut"?  Should the electric company (who provided the electricity you used tolight that kitchen) get "a BIG cut"?

  If someone doesn't have direct input, they don't get anything.  That's simple enough, IMO.  Any players in the game would get credit as playtesters, and RPOL would get credit as the vehicle for the playtest - but that'd be it.

  Jeeze.


  They are crap, because while I can apparently respect other's decisions to share their stuff ... you apparently cannot or will not respect that it should be someone's CHOICE wether or not to share - not something that'd be a default setting.

  Copyright by default is a GOOD thing, both in terms of the things here, and the law.  What's mine is mine, what's yours is yours, and what either of us wants to borrow from the other should involve the simple courtesy of ASKING.

  Wanting that protected state tobe the default does not make anyone selfish.  Insisting that a CC-model "enforced sharing" is anything even CLOSE to happily sharing among ourselves is a line of BS.  CC is a wonderful option which I will probably excercise in various ways for various things.  But it's not right to insist "use CC ... or you're a selfish bastard".

People not taking the hint. Thanks all for your contributions :)