# DMGenie - Masters of the Djinn Yahoo Group missing



## rom90125 (Sep 8, 2005)

Does anyone have insight as to why this Yahoo Group was nixed?


----------



## Zulithe (Sep 9, 2005)

Some details here:

http://evildm.blogspot.com/

Hopefully more will come to light soon.


----------



## jcfiala (Sep 9, 2005)

Zulithe said:
			
		

> Some details here:
> 
> http://evildm.blogspot.com/
> 
> Hopefully more will come to light soon.




I just looked on the discussion pages of the DM Genie.  Apparently someone reported that the group had copyrighted materials, they confirmed it, and they shut it down and all of his email as well.

It's a shame - they had been working to make sure that the people who used the files actually owned the books in question - but Yahoo's pretty draconian - if they spot you doing something wrong, you're shut down like that.  *snap*.


----------



## rom90125 (Sep 9, 2005)

I agree.  Being a newb to such matters, I am curious if there is a _legal_ way for users of DMGenie to share copyrighted material assuming all parties in question own a copy of the protected material.  If I want to script the PrC _Fang of Lolth_ for DMGenie, is there anyway I can share this script with other users that also own the original copyrighted source material from which this PrC came from?


----------



## smootrk (Sep 9, 2005)

rom90125 said:
			
		

> I agree.  Being a newb to such matters, I am curious if there is a _legal_ way for users of DMGenie to share copyrighted material assuming all parties in question own a copy of the protected material.  If I want to script the PrC _Fang of Lolth_ for DMGenie, is there anyway I can share this script with other users that also own the original copyrighted source material from which this PrC came from?



I do not think you will have much to worry about sharing code based upon WOTC's copyrighted materials as long as you are sharing directly with other folks whom you know own the materials as well.  I think the problems stems from 'posting' these copyrighted works in a place where they can be freely downloaded, even among a group's membership.

If you create some code, and want to share it, you will need to take responsibility for who receives that material, not just share openly.  WOTC wants to sell game material, not see it freely distributed in a way that bypasses the purchasing of the books as well.


----------



## Zulithe (Sep 9, 2005)

"WOTC wants to sell game material, not see it freely distributed in a way that bypasses the purchasing of the books as well."

The zip/rar files are passworded and require knowledge that only someone who possesses the book could know (like words on certain pages). Maybe not the most secure way, but it is an effort. Now granted I saw a few files that were not in zips that anyone could have dowloaded. I won't defend that, and it is a mistake that whoever uploaded it should not have made.

In the future, I think making the groups harder to join in order to safeguard against those wanting to download material they don't own would be a good idea.


----------



## kingpaul (Sep 9, 2005)

Zulithe said:
			
		

> The zip/rar files are passworded and require knowledge that only someone who possesses the book could know (like words on certain pages).



Actually, that's not true. I could go into a store and look the words up without ever having to buy the book


			
				Zulithe said:
			
		

> In the future, I think making the groups harder to join in order to safeguard against those wanting to download material they don't own would be a good idea.



But once again, we're talking about distributing IP without the owner's permission.


----------



## Zulithe (Sep 9, 2005)

Hi paul.

If people are going to steal or wish to be maliciuos, there is no way to totally prevent that. We see it with regards to movies, music, computer software and games all the time. The best one can do is try to prevent it in a reasonable way that doesn't negatively effect legitimate users of the material.

"Actually, that's not true. I could go into a store and look the words up without ever having to buy the book"

yes... and I could walk into a convenience store and jot down codes from under the bottle cap of a pepsi to get free iTunes music. But I don't.


----------



## DonTadow (Sep 9, 2005)

Sounds kind of fishy.  Just a week or two ago i was commenting how good it is to have a program that has a nice community.  Someone from codemonkey got pissed about it.   Just fishy in my books.


----------



## DonTadow (Sep 10, 2005)

Zulithe said:
			
		

> Hi paul.
> 
> If people are going to steal or wish to be maliciuos, there is no way to totally prevent that. We see it with regards to movies, music, computer software and games all the time. The best one can do is try to prevent it in a reasonable way that doesn't negatively effect legitimate users of the material.
> 
> ...



This is though if you're going through that much trouble to get the material then you're probably going to steal the real thing.   I advice he be a little more careful to whom he let into the groups from now on.


----------



## Kirin'Tor (Sep 10, 2005)

The real problem is, even with the effort to use a 'password' from teh books themselves, it isn't sanctioned by WotC (or the other companies that may or may not have been involved), and thus it's still a breach of copyright.

Even if you were to find a way to 100% prove they owned the book - where going to the store & reading it, or emailing the code around couldn't happen - then it's still a crime to distribute it, unless given premission by the copyright holder.

For the same reason it's illegal to download the PDF of a book, even if you own it - the publisher could (adn often does) sell the PDF copy on it's own, then yor're taking tha that ability away from them. WotC (and others) have chosen to make the data/character generation capability of their books available in specific formats, and it's a illegal to distribute it in another format, or in that 'sanctioned' format without compensation to teh copyright holder. (It's illegal regardless of whether or not a publisher sell the product in that format, but in the PDF example & the DMGenie case, the original holder happens to.)


----------



## DonTadow (Sep 10, 2005)

Kirin'Tor said:
			
		

> The real problem is, even with the effort to use a 'password' from teh books themselves, it isn't sanctioned by WotC (or the other companies that may or may not have been involved), and thus it's still a breach of copyright.
> 
> Even if you were to find a way to 100% prove they owned the book - where going to the store & reading it, or emailing the code around couldn't happen - then it's still a crime to distribute it, unless given premission by the copyright holder.
> 
> For the same reason it's illegal to download the PDF of a book, even if you own it - the publisher could (adn often does) sell the PDF copy on it's own, then yor're taking tha that ability away from them. WotC (and others) have chosen to make the data/character generation capability of their books available in specific formats, and it's a illegal to distribute it in another format, or in that 'sanctioned' format without compensation to teh copyright holder. (It's illegal regardless of whether or not a publisher sell the product in that format, but in the PDF example & the DMGenie case, the original holder happens to.)



This reminded me of another thread i was in just before the closing (which is why i'm suspcious that those jealous guys at codemonkey might have had something to do with it).  The thing is you're not putting direct content into dmgenie, you are putting your interpreation of the content, similiar to a quiote from a book.  Nothing that was originally wotc material makes it into the program.  It's a wierd legal issue and one I dont think is much of an issue.  Making that illegal would make every cliff note, every website review, every college thesis illegal as well.  In an equal ground of legality they'd have a hard time trying to prove a script for monk of tatooes is similiar to the tattoed monk from complete warrior if enough is changed. 

Part of the reason why i dont buy too many wotc books, nor buy any of the updates for etools, their manipulating the laws for profit because of big brother hasbro.


----------



## kingpaul (Sep 10, 2005)

Zulithe said:
			
		

> If people are going to steal or wish to be maliciuos, there is no way to totally prevent that.



So its OK to distribute IP that isn't yours because someone else is going to do it anyway?


----------



## Kirin'Tor (Sep 10, 2005)

DonTadow said:
			
		

> Part of the reason why i dont buy too many wotc books, nor buy any of the updates for etools, their manipulating the laws for profit because of big brother hasbro.




Well, you could look at it that way, or you could look at it from a less abberant viewpoint:
Their using pre-established law to maintain what slim profit margins their character generator pulls in. If people are just giving away that content (whether it's the official eT data sets, user made eT data sets [that were all the rage before CMP], or sets for another d20 Char-Gen) then it's eating away at their profitability.

And even beyond that, there's the issue of OGL/d20 liscences. I assmue DMGenie claims at least OGL compatibility. If so, then even making it _possible_ to put a companies PI into their program realy brings into question their lisence status.


----------



## Kirin'Tor (Sep 10, 2005)

kingpaul said:
			
		

> So its OK to distribute IP that isn't yours because someone else is going to do it anyway?




That's where most of these arguments tend to go, wether music via napster movies via ed2k, pdfs via kazaa, or datasets via groups:

"It's OK to violate copyrights because other people do it too!!!"


----------



## kingpaul (Sep 10, 2005)

DonTadow said:
			
		

> The thing is you're not putting direct content into dmgenie, you are putting your interpreation of the content, similiar to a quiote from a book.



The whole books is copyrighted, which includes the names of the feats, classes, spells, etc. By making a dataset of the book available is distributing another's IP.


			
				DonTadow said:
			
		

> Part of the reason why i dont buy too many wotc books, nor buy any of the updates for etools, their manipulating the laws for profit because of big brother hasbro.



Its manipulating the laws by stating distributing the IP of someone is illegal if you don't have permission?


----------



## DonTadow (Sep 10, 2005)

kingpaul said:
			
		

> The whole books is copyrighted, which includes the names of the feats, classes, spells, etc. By making a dataset of the book available is distributing another's IP.
> 
> Its manipulating the laws by stating distributing the IP of someone is illegal if you don't have permission?



Its just this is a murky part of the subject.  People use the same type of ip to write reviews, reports, research books and such.  Except, in these cases, they are distrubuted at costs.   Instead of hating on other programs, etools should really reevaluate why their product brings in slim revenue.  Eh i dont even like their product but i'm tempted to downlaod all the datasets just to spite them.  It just urks me when people squieeze little guys because of their own failures.


----------



## kingpaul (Sep 10, 2005)

DonTadow said:
			
		

> I advice he be a little more careful to whom he let into the groups from now on.



So you are condoning and encouraging the distribution of IP?


----------



## kingpaul (Sep 10, 2005)

DonTadow said:
			
		

> Eh i dont even like their product but i'm tempted to downlaod all the datasets just to spite them.



So, because you don't think WotC's position on their IP is correct, you think its alright to steal CMP's licensed product?


			
				DonTadow said:
			
		

> It just urks me when people squieeze little guys because of their own failures.



So, you think following the law is squeezing people?


----------



## Mynex (Sep 10, 2005)

*Hey Mods*

The insults, accusations, insinuations, and flat out declarations of theft of IP being 'Okay' are unacceptable.

But I suppose I shouldn't be surprised.  Seems that a lot of unacceptable behaviour is allowed when it's directed at us, so I should be used to it by now.

*shrug* Whatever.


----------



## drakhe (Sep 10, 2005)

*more bad reasoning...*



			
				Kirin'Tor said:
			
		

> That's where most of these arguments tend to go, wether music via napster movies via ed2k, pdfs via kazaa, or datasets via groups:
> 
> "It's OK to violate copyrights because other people do it too!!!"




This is not the only bogus reasoning: when speaking to friends or colleagues about piracy, one argument I've heard of at least a couple of people is: "I can't afford this item, so I have the right to get it any way I can". One guy in particular had bought a playstation, but (having a small salary) complained that the PS games were too expensive, so he had a right to make copies of ps games.

I've actualy been laughed at by colleagues when I told them I would buy a certain CD when they offered me a copy (my reasoning: if I like the CD I want to buy it for two reasons: a) I want to support the artist and b) I prefer the real thing with original box and booklet etc over a shabby copy anytime).


----------



## DonTadow (Sep 10, 2005)

Mynex said:
			
		

> The insults, accusations, insinuations, and flat out declarations of theft of IP being 'Okay' are unacceptable.
> 
> But I suppose I shouldn't be surprised.  Seems that a lot of unacceptable behaviour is allowed when it's directed at us, so I should be used to it by now.
> 
> *shrug* Whatever.



I just find it ironic after that thread this happens.  Your way of "keeping in good with papa wotc" could also be deemed unacceptable.  I believe there is nothing in the forum rules that says we do not have a right to voice our opinion.  My opinion is based on the evidence of your companies rage displayed in the thread coupled with the timing of the thread and the shutdown of the yahoo forum.  

All I said was that I'd download etool datapacks, dont really know how that equates into stealing.  Now, what I didnt say was if I was going to purchase and then download them or not.  Of course you can count on me to do the right thing 

HOnestly its not even worth the harddrive space.  HOwever I will make sure to encourage my friends to leave their computers on, put their  etool datapacks in their download file folders  and their file sharing software left on over night.


----------



## DonTadow (Sep 10, 2005)

thread only days before the yahoo group disappeared. 

http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=146153


----------



## kingpaul (Sep 10, 2005)

DonTadow said:
			
		

> Your way of "keeping in good with papa wotc" could also be deemed unacceptable.



So, once again, you believe that its ok to infringe upon WotC's IP?


			
				DonTadow said:
			
		

> I believe there is nothing in the forum rules that says we do not have a right to voice our opinion.



Opinions, no I don't think there's a problem with that. Encouraging others to break laws, that I do believe there is a problem with


			
				DonTadow said:
			
		

> My opinion is based on the evidence of your companies rage displayed in the thread coupled with the timing of the thread and the shutdown of the yahoo forum.



What was discussed in that thread was the distribution of another's IP without their permission.


			
				DonTadow said:
			
		

> HOwever I will make sure to encourage my friends to leave their computers on, put their  etool datapacks in their download file folders  and their file sharing software left on over night.



So you are going to encourage your friends to break the law?


----------



## kingpaul (Sep 10, 2005)

DonTadow said:
			
		

> thread only days before the yahoo group disappeared.
> 
> http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=146153



Yes, that was the thread where it was discussed that it was illegal to distribute another's IP without their permission.


----------



## DonTadow (Sep 10, 2005)

kingpaul said:
			
		

> So, once again, you believe that its ok to infringe upon WotC's IP?
> 
> Opinions, no I don't think there's a problem with that. Encouraging others to break laws, that I do believe there is a problem with
> 
> ...



Again, there is no law, only minor litigation that wtoc  has used to their advantage.  An equal fight would see no breaking of the law for what is essentially note taking or reviewing.  Perhaps I could even put jokes in my script and call it a spoof so its protected.  Its murky at best.  But i will encourage my friends to share any scripts they created to show their artistic talents.  Whatever they decideto share is up to them.  Might be a minor calculator could be notes from a book they'v read. 

This thread is not about IP, its about shotty and dishonest business practices.  I'll make sure to spread the word.


----------



## kingpaul (Sep 10, 2005)

DonTadow said:
			
		

> This thread is not about IP, its about shotty and dishonest business practices.  I'll make sure to spread the word.



I *am* discussing the distribution of IP. Becaue you don't agree with it doesn't mean that its against the law to infringe on someone elses IP by distributing it without their permission.


----------



## rom90125 (Sep 10, 2005)

kingpaul said:
			
		

> Yes, that was the thread where it was discussed that it was illegal to distribute another's IP without their permission.






			
				kingpaul said:
			
		

> Once again, both CMP and PCGen have communities. We also don't advocate the dissemination of someone else's IP.




KingPaul, you might want to be a bit more judicious with your comments.  The aforementioned quote could imply that you are slandering other products mentioned in these threads.  Thus far, no one has said anything about RolePlayingMaster, DMGenie, Kloogewerks, or any other product advocating the dissemination of someone else's IP.  Bad form KingPaul...


----------



## kingpaul (Sep 10, 2005)

rom90125 said:
			
		

> KingPaul, you might want to be a bit more judicious with your comments.  The aforementioned quote could imply that you are slandering other products mentioned in these threads.  Thus far, no one has said anything about RolePlayingMaster, DMGenie, Kloogewerks, or any other product advocating the dissemination of someon else's IP.  Bad form KingPaul...



Allow me to point at this post: http://www.enworld.org/showpost.php?p=2535260&postcount=7

There DonTadow states that WotC books can be found in DMGenie's forums. Why is it bad form for me to point this out?


----------



## rom90125 (Sep 10, 2005)

So KingPaul and Mynex,

I'll bite the bait and ask straight up (assuming you'll be honest with your response).  Is CMG on a witchhunt?  Are the monkeys policing the Wizard's IP?


----------



## rom90125 (Sep 10, 2005)

kingpaul said:
			
		

> Allow me to point at this post: http://www.enworld.org/showpost.php?p=2535260&postcount=7
> 
> There DonTadow states that WotC books can be found in DMGenie's forums. Why is it bad form for me to point this out?




Then DonTadow misspoke and that is an incorrect statement.  Goto www.dmgenie.com for yourself and validate his statement before making an assumption.  There is no IP infringment on that site.  If a few fans of the software want to create a Y! group and share their own scripts...well, how can you stop them?  By scouring the Y! groups daily is one way.  Or taking something someone said in another forum and turning it over to the mods at Y! is another...


----------



## Mynex (Sep 10, 2005)

DonTadow said:
			
		

> Again, there is no law, only minor litigation that wtoc  has used to their advantage.  An equal fight would see no breaking of the law for what is essentially note taking or reviewing.  Perhaps I could even put jokes in my script and call it a spoof so its protected.  Its murky at best.  But i will encourage my friends to share any scripts they created to show their artistic talents.  Whatever they decideto share is up to them.  Might be a minor calculator could be notes from a book they'v read.
> 
> This thread is not about IP, its about shotty and dishonest business practices.  I'll make sure to spread the word.




Hey Nathan, do yourself a favor and stop making slanderous and libelous statements against my company.

I'm curious why you took a factual discussion on IP and turned it into a personal 'hate on' for CMP... where's your journalistic detachment and integrity?

I wonder if your publisher, assuming you've been published that is, would appreciate knowing that one of their journalists not only engages in slanderous and libelous activities with no proof (innocent until proven guilty, eh?) and engaging in (from your own mouth, in the other thread) to encouraging people to break the law.

you don't have to like how the law is set up, you don't have to agree with it, but you do have to abide by it.  Failure to abide by it, i.e. breaking the law, is a criminal activity.  doesn't matter if it's a minor civili infraction or a serious felony.. the law is the law, period.

You break it, you're a criminal.  There is no debate over that.

The debate(s) may be over whether a law should be a law is a seperate discussion, and THAT is where all the emotion and 'hate on' should be.  Not in a factual discussion about what is and isn't currently illegal.

Distributing another person's or company's IP is currently illegal.  Period.  The why's and wherefor's don't matter in this specific discussion.  That is the reality of things as they stand now.  You distribute another person's IP without their consent, you're breaking the law.

Pretty cut and dried really.

So, start discussing thing rationally, politely, and without accusations, insults, slurs, and other rudeness, and I'll be more than happy to carry on that discussion.

There is no reason for you to be slamming my company... well other than YOU have a 'hate on' for corporate America (HA! CMP = Corporate America, THAT is funny!)

As I posted in the Y! group, don't agitate me.


----------



## Mynex (Sep 10, 2005)

rom90125 said:
			
		

> So KingPaul and Mynex,
> 
> I'll bite the bait and ask straight up (assuming you'll be honest with your response).  Is CMG on a witchhunt?  Are the monkeys policing the Wizard's IP?




Well I don't think _CMG_ is on a witchhunt for anything.. other than, like every publisher, more sales.  And I really don't think Mark would appreciate being brought into this 'discussion'. 

Seriously though, CMP is not a witchhunt, never has been, never will be.  It's not our job to 'seek & destroy' for publishers about their IP.  That's their job.

This entire series of nastiness began with me stating facts about IP and DonTadow taking it personally.

*shrug*


----------



## rom90125 (Sep 10, 2005)

I agree with Mynex on this...it is getting extremely ugly.  Whatever issues there are between you and DonTadow shouldn't factor into this thread.  When I originally started the thread, I was asking a honest question.  And to be honest, I wasn't the original 'seeker of knowledge' on this issue.  I read a personal blog that talked about this subject and thought I would ask the nice peeps at Enworld if they could enlighten me.  That is all.


----------



## Mynex (Sep 10, 2005)

rom90125 said:
			
		

> Then DonTadow misspoke and that is an incorrect statement.  Goto www.dmgenie.com for yourself and validate his statement before making an assumption.  There is no IP infringment on that site.  If a few fans of the software want to create a Y! group and share their own scripts...well, how can you stop them?  By scouring the Y! groups daily is one way.  Or taking something someone said in another forum and turning it over to the mods at Y! is another...




I've read all the various threads and whatnot about this shutting down of that particular Y! group... including the one on the DM Genie forums...

Personally, I think Y! acted poorly in nuking him entirely.  Nuking the group, sure... but to nuke his entire account?  that's too much in my opinion.

But, even he admited that he expected something to happen sometime (on the  DM Genie forum he said that)...  So he knew there were IP violations present and didn't police them himself...

That's the Y! group mod I'm referring to, not the creator of DM Genie... I've got, and use, DM Genie (along with a ton of other software), and not one of any of the software creators host any files they shouldn't.

So the yea, sure, there's a ton of Y! groups out there that share files they shouldn't, and this should serve a warning about IP sharing without permission.

Probably won't.. but hey, that's the individual's choice who mods these groups.  (still, nuking the entire account? a _premium_ one?  Too far imo *shakes head*)


----------



## rom90125 (Sep 10, 2005)

OK...another question.  How are 'play by post' threads not infringing on IP?  Isn't the DM/Mod of that thread also posting non-OGL content when transcribing the text from the original source?

And before anyone flames me, this is another newb/honest question.  I've been tempted many times to get involved with a PbP but I'm still pure as the driven snow to this point.


----------



## Zulithe (Sep 10, 2005)

Well kingpaul there are plenty of questions you pose here that I'd not mind answering in another context (in fact I started writing a pretty lengthly answer before changing my mind) but it feels like you are baiting the conversation. To what end? I couldn't be bothered.

All I'm interested in is practicing fair use. And I find it insulting when I see the word "theft" thrown around. I do not practice theft. That being so, what others practice is of no interest to me. If you make it your interst, by all means waste up your time hitting people over the head with your law book. I'll be busy writing adventures.


----------



## kingpaul (Sep 10, 2005)

Zulithe said:
			
		

> it feels like you are baiting the conversation. To what end?



To fully understand what people are saying.


			
				Zulithe said:
			
		

> All I'm interested in is practicing fair use.



And WotC has said that it is not 'fair use' to distribute datasets, its an infringement of their IP.


			
				Zulithe said:
			
		

> And I find it insulting when I see the word "theft" thrown around.



Then what else should I call the act of taking something that you have not purchased or have acquired from someone who does not have the rights to distribute?


			
				Zulithe said:
			
		

> I'll be busy writing adventures.



And what does writing adventures have to do with the distribution of IP?


----------



## rom90125 (Sep 10, 2005)

KingPaul, stop trying to pick fights   

Since you seem to be a guru of all things IP-related, answer my earlier question about PbP and IP infringement.  I'm curious to hear your response.


----------



## kingpaul (Sep 10, 2005)

rom90125 said:
			
		

> KingPaul, stop trying to pick fights



Not trying to pick fights, trying to understand statements made by other people


			
				rom90125 said:
			
		

> Since you seem to be a guru of all things IP-related, answer my earlier question about PbP and IP infringement.  I'm curious to hear your response.



Are the GMs in question on these PbPs disseminating the closed-content material to the players?


----------



## rom90125 (Sep 10, 2005)

I'm no lawyer, and I don't play one on TV, but it sure sounds like KingPaul sees this subject matter in a very black & white frame of mind.



> Are the GMs in question on these PbPs disseminating the closed-content material to the players?




I suppose some of them could be.  Do the mods here check every post of every PbP thread?  If not, are they being negligent?  For example, there is no OGC in _City of the Spider Queen_ but I know I've seen CotSQ PbP threads out there.  Are we to begin policing these threads as well?  Heck, go the WotC website right now and search for CoTSQ and you will find one thread dedicated to nothing but converting the non-OGC NPCS from the adventure to the 3.5 ruleset.  Ironic, isn't it, that you and I are having an IP discussion (mainly about WotC I presumed) and yet there is IP infringement right on their own site.  Sinners...


----------



## rom90125 (Sep 10, 2005)

btw, on a small side note, my lurking ways are failing me as I finally broke the century mark in posts.  I'm beginning to get nervous...


----------



## kingpaul (Sep 10, 2005)

rom90125 said:
			
		

> I'm no lawyer, and I don't play one on TV, but it sure sounds like KingPaul sees this subject matter in a very black & white frame of mind.



I'm not a lawyer either. But I do see IP distribution in black and white; if you're not the owner or have the owners's permission, then distributing their IP not a good thing.


			
				rom90125 said:
			
		

> I suppose some of them could be.



And the wholesale distribution of IP is copyright infringement. And distirbuting datasets of IP material without the IP owner's permission is copyright infringement.


----------



## rom90125 (Sep 10, 2005)

kingpaul said:
			
		

> And the wholesale distribution of IP is copyright infringement. And distirbuting datasets of IP material without the IP owner's permission is copyright infringement.




OK, but that still doesn't answer the questions I presented in my post regarding CotSQ and the apparent IP infringement occuring in their own forums.  Are you attempting to be coy with me?    Silly...  Anyway, here is the thread I mentioned.  http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=255217
Take a look and let me know if this is infringement and if you think we should notify WotC.

Edit:  Oh and to save you a few posts, it clearly states in CotSQ that no part of this game product contains OGC.  That should answer your next post...


----------



## Mynex (Sep 10, 2005)

rom90125 said:
			
		

> OK, but that still doesn't answer the questions I presented in my post regarding CotSQ and the apparent IP infringement occuring in their own forums.  Are you attempting to be coy with me?    Silly...  Anyway, here is the thread I mentioned.  http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=255217
> Take a look and let me know if this is infringement and if you think we should notify WotC.
> 
> Edit:  Oh and to save you a few posts, it clearly states in CotSQ that no part of this game product contains OGC.  That should answer your next post...




See, there's one critical difference here.  The WotC forums are _theirs_.  theycan discuss, distribute, change, charge for, give for free anything of _their_ material they want to in any format they want to.

WotC doesn't care about Joe GM and his gaming crew swapping stuff back and forth between each other.... What they care about is wholesale sharing of their material.

See the whole issue over IP is ownership... they _HAVE_ to protect their IP or they lose legal protections over it.... So are they are on a witch hunt?  Nope... but if someone (i.e. website, Y! Group, etc) hits their radar, then they'll do something about it... are they out aggressively searching for this stuff?  I'm sure they are from time to time... but ya know what?  They  would much rather spend their time writing new material...

Oh, wait.. saying all that, as logical as it is, make me a 'WotC lapdog' doesn't it?

Oh well... guess I am then... damn that logic thing!


----------



## Samuel Leming (Sep 10, 2005)

Mynex said:
			
		

> But I suppose I shouldn't be surprised.  Seems that a lot of unacceptable behaviour is allowed when it's directed at us, so I should be used to it by now.




This happens to you guys a lot?  My first thought on counteracting this kind of thing would be to examine what the differences are between you and the groups that aren’t taking all this guff.

Don’t get used to it…  Correct it and then you’ll be able to make more money. 

Sam


----------



## Samuel Leming (Sep 10, 2005)

kingpaul said:
			
		

> So you are condoning and encouraging the distribution of IP?




As I asked in that other thread, what’s IP and what isn’t?

Let’s say I buy the _Complete Book of Cheese_ and I’m discussing it with another player named Matt.  I mention that 123 feats(that would be pretty cheesy) can be found therein.  Matt wants to know what they are so I list them on a sheet of paper and give it to him.

Is this distribution of IP?  If so, is it even outside of fair use?

OK, so let’s say this discussion is happening online and I send Matt this list by e-mail.

Once again, is this a violation of copyright?  I still don’t think so.

Now let’s say there’s about a dozen other players curious about the cheesy feats, so I list the feat names in an online database with a web interface.

IP violation? 

Say I enter the prerequisites for these feats also.

IP violation?  I still don’t believe so.

Now what’s the difference between what I’ve just described and creating a “dataset” for some program where feats can be tacked onto a character like ornaments on a Christmas tree?

Sam


----------



## Samuel Leming (Sep 10, 2005)

Mynex said:
			
		

> See the whole issue over IP is ownership... they _HAVE_ to protect their IP or they lose legal protections over it....




This isn't entirely accurate.

They have to jealously protect their trademarks, but there's nothing anyone can do that would cause them to lose their copyrights.

Sam


----------



## DonTadow (Sep 10, 2005)

The point of this thread is what happened to the masters of the djinn site. I didn't bring up IP or the right to IP. I'd love to keep things to the thread topic.  Just like hte last topic.  The guy asked a question about e-tools and I told him my opinion and alternatives.  The argument always happens when someone from CMP (which it usually is) comes onto the thread preaching about how they dont like to see others ips taken for granted and the law and yada yada.  

The fact that CMP is even on this thread further makes me more suspcious.  What does CMP have to do with DM genie.  Last i heard you wern't a fan of the program.  

If you were a fan of masters of the djinn and you're on this thread, you obviously are wondering what happened to it.  My point is that first, we had the thread about dmgenie and the user forums, two days later, after CMP raised a ruckus about how wrong it is, the guy loses his emails, forums and other yahoo information.  

I slammed CMP in the last thread because I believe you make profit off of easily created items with the datapacks.  HOwever, this thread is about the actions I believe you guys did to have the yahoo group shut down (which you have not denyed). If this was a crime youd be the first suspects, simply because of the irate nature of your remarks only a month ago.    You showed anger towards the community and it was noted a few times that you were quite upset.  Plus, again, you're on a forum about a program you also stated was inferior to your own, that you do not like.   SUre ,it could be just a big coinecodence.  But its a heck of a one.  Plus agin reading your remarks, it doesnt sound like you're denying any involvement. Far from the contrary, your remarks on here are more of a "good ridance i'm glad thats gone , they were criminals on there". Looking back on the thread, theres not one remark showing that you have any interest in what happened to the forum only to see how people reacted that it was gone and comment about how bad it was anyway.  

BTW, I don't hide my name, address, zip its all in whois under my name of chrystaria.  This IP i use is unmasked on purpose. I also own detroitwriter.com and several other business ventures.  As a matter of fact, you can go there and read my whole resume.  as well as my news clips, i am glad you are taking such an interest in my life.  

As far as libel and slander, now whose accusing? I've been a journalist for 10 years, and know the book pretty easily.  I can clearly say my opinions about so long as it is sttated they are my opinions and my opinions are dereived from several previously noted activities that i personaly found suspicious.  I believe hte people whom work for CMP and commented their dislikes about the forum in the previous thread  had something to do with the shutdown based on these suspiciouns.


----------



## azhrei_fje (Sep 10, 2005)

This is an amusing thread.   And this is a huge post.  If you don't care about intellectual property law, skip it.  But if you do continue reading, be aware that I'm not trying to be accurate in general, only as it applies to this thread.

First, if anyone reading this is a lawyer and wants to clarify, please do; IANAL, but I've read a lot about IP and I think I grasp most of it, although probably not the detailed nuances.  Here are the categories I see:

1.  Trademarks.  If someone uses a trademark and gives credit to the owner, there is no infringement.  This is why you'll see all kinds of advertising that mentions the trademark ownership of competing products.  There are exceptions to this; it's based on dilution of product identity.  And no, that's not exactly the same as WotC with their beholders or yuan-ti.

2.  Patents.  A patent is exclusive authority to produce, or to control production of, a system, technique, process, method, ...  A patent is used to protect a method of accomplishing something.  They are relatively short-lived (17 or more years, depending on the type of patent; used to be flat 17 years, but that's changed).

3.  Copyrights.  They protect the expression of an idea, *NOT* the idea itself.  So, if I publish an item from the previous category (patents), I can copyright that publication, but not the system, technique, process, etc.  Because only the expression is protected, there are gray areas.  For example, the WotC XP table would be protected: font, type size, column layout, etc.  Any reasonable judge would extrapolate and rule that changing only those items would still constitute a violation.  However, a formula that generates the same table of numbers may or may not be a violation.  A formula can only be covered by a patent, and WotC doesn't have a patent on their game system (note the use of the word "system").

4.  Trade secrets.  These can be anything that would normally fall under #2 or #3, but the creator considers keeping them secret to be more beneficial in the market than releasing the information.  For example, instead of filing a patent and trying to enforce it, it might be easier to keep it secret.  There's a long discussion about whether that's practical or not.  But this thread isn't about trade secrets, so I'm not going into it.

It's very important that #2 and #3 be clear:  you cannot "copyright" a way to do something, and you cannot "patent" a book.

Fair use in the U.S. is based on the idea that writers and journalists will want to be able to quote other written works.  This is the whole "standing on the shoulders of giants" philosophy.  So the "fair use doctrine" was established to allow such things.  However, the framers of the Constitution couldn't envision the electronic world we live in and Congress (opposite of "Progress"?) dreamed up their own definitions.  That's one of the reasons we have such a mess on our hands:  our congressmen react to lobbyists, not to technical experts who represent the views of the citizens.

Having said all that, scanning a book and distributing a PDF is illegal.  (However, it is not "theft", or "stealing", or "piracy".  It is "copyright infringement".  Those first three terms all have specific meanings and anyone who uses them to refer to illegal distribution of intellectual property doesn't understand the proper use of the words.  IMHO, of course. )  It was not, at the time our country's laws were written, feasible to photocopy a book or scan an entire document.  They weren't concerned about such things; they were concerned that a writer wouldn't quote large sections of text.  This is why the law doesn't say how much can be copied and still be within the "fair use" statute.  Note that copying something for your own use is still illegal!  The courts, if you were prosecuted, would consider many details, including but not limited to, profit motive, amount copied, and breadth of distribution.

All of the above leaves out one key point:  laws are made for the protection of citizens.  One of the biggest mistakes (again, IMHO) this country ever made was to grant corporations the legal status of an individual.  This significantly murkied the water in a number of ways, and was NOT the way the Constitution had originally been conceived.

Because laws are made to guide citizens in ethical conduct (what are laws except an implementation of morality and ethics by a group of people known as "government"?), they can and do change.  To argue that some particular act is illegal and the perpetrator is a criminal is false.  Someone who commits an illegal act is a suspect and is alleged to have committed a crime, but they are not a criminal until convicted.  But laws change because of court decisions -- look at how the pendulum is swinging in _Roe vs. Wade_ right now.

We even have a phrase to represent the kind of activity that invites prosecution:  civil disobedience.  This is when a citizen purposefully disobeys a law and incurs the wrath of the government, or other body, in order to point out how the law is flawed.  For example, see this link http://www.papersplease.org/gilmore/ if you'd like to read about John Gilmore, an individual who decided that he wanted to travel to Washington, DC, to visit his congressman, but refused to show identification to board the airplane leaving San Francisco.  He wasn't allowed to board.  His constitutional right to meet with his legislative representative was infringed, as well as his guarantee against illegal search and seizure.  In addition, he was arrested for breaking a law that the Transportation Security Administration refused to reveal to him ("You broke a law, but we can't tell you what it is -- national security"!).  It has been said that the first thing a tyrant does is institute policies "for the safety of the population".  Keep your eye on New Orleans -- it'll be interesting to see if people are forced to evacuate and how the government handles those that refuse.

Another example is Philip Zimmerman, author of the PGP encryption software.  The government claimed his software was a "munition" (technically, encryption devices are munitions, and export to a non-allied country is considered treason).  So they forced him to shut down his web site where the code resided.  His solution?  He wrote a book and asked the government for clearance to export it. The executive branch gave him the thumbs-up.  The contents of the book?  The complete source code to the software!  The book was even printed without page numbers or headers/footers, specifically so that it could be easily scanned and OCR'd.  Once the Justice Department learned of it, they eventually dropped the case.  But only AFTER Phil had spent hundreds of thousands of his own dollars to defend himself!  (I bought a copy of said book, but can't find it on my shelf right now -- I probably tossed it out when I moved a couple years ago.)

All of that shows that individuals can, and SHOULD, push the limits of the law.  And while it's not a valid argument to say, "everyone else is doing it, so I can too!", it is also true that if everyone else IS doing it, the law is likely to change. 

To sum up:  is it illegal to scan a book into a PDF, even for your own use?  Yes.  Is it illegal to scan a single page (or two) from a book for your own use?  Probably not.  (But you can be sued for anything, and usually the money wins.  No, it's not fair, but our laws are not designed to be fair -- and don't let anyone convince you otherwise.)  Is it illegal to discuss with someone else the content of the book?  No.  Is it illegal to give a list of chapter titles to someone else?  Probably not.  Is it illegal to read the entire book out loud and have your friend listen to it on the other end of the phone?  Probably not.  Is it illegal for said friend to record the book while you speak it?  Yes.

As I mentioned earlier, IANAL.  And if you use this text as legal advice, you're an idiot.    My effort to instruct was probably in vain; I've found most people don't take an interest in their own welfare.  Heck, why else would voter turnout be so low in this country?  (But I'll bet the voters turn out in droves in 2008, eh?!)

If I've made a fool of myself with this post, please tell the world about it and post a correction. :\   I for one would really like to know if I have this wrong...


----------



## rom90125 (Sep 10, 2005)

Azhrei, 

Thanks for taking the time to post.  I, for one, enjoyed the informal lesson.


----------



## rom90125 (Sep 10, 2005)

> See, there's one critical difference here. The WotC forums are _theirs_. theycan discuss, distribute, change, charge for, give for free anything of _their_ material they want to in any format they want to.
> 
> WotC doesn't care about Joe GM and his gaming crew swapping stuff back and forth between each other.... What they care about is wholesale sharing of their material.




So, following this logic, I could write a non-OGL PrC script for a software app, say, PCGEN, and publish it on the WotC boards, correct?  It's _their_ boards so they won't care that I'm sharing it with my online group...


----------



## bloodydrake (Sep 10, 2005)

sigh the IP police are in full riot gear as usual..
I so enjoy the fact they make blanket statements on THE LAW without ever considering that they don't know THE LAWS of every country out there.
For example in my home country up until recently its been completely legal for me to lend an item of something i buy to someone and legal for them to make a copy..yep thats right.As long as i didn't make the copy for them that is.


As well the concept of Fair Use is oblivious to them,media shifting,timeshifting,format conversion,ect ect..just because someone says there isn't any fair use of our product..don't mean there isn't..it just means they dont' condon it and retain the legal right to pursue action they don't agree with.And along the way hopefully someone with lots of cash will be willing to fight for the rights of indiviuals ..that are being unjustly criminalized.

Any fool knows there are many laws that are not about whats right or fair use..but whats right for those with the big bucks,about protecting their ability to gouge the average person of as much cash as they can.
The legal system is so far behind what the curve they are trying to make blanket laws in the states,like the DMA,that protect those with big bucks without really considering just how unjust they are..

In My Opinion,If i make a converted copy of some IP from paper to electronic ..as any joe can, and lend it to anyone that sends me a digital picture of them holding the same IP and a receipt Proving beyond a shadow a doubt that they own it as well. There is no reason we shouldn't be able to share the converted IP..PERIOD.
Yet the IP police will rant and rave how degenerate we are for doing so..that we are nothing but common criminals bla bla bal..Capitalist Greed at its worst.

Do we really need to pull up every LAW that has been found to be unjust unconstitutional for every country out there to prove that sometimes just because something is a law that its not right?

Now in all of this i'm in no way advocating the blanket stealing of a product.If you don't own a copy of it,theres no reason you should be trying to share it,go buy a copy.
But In my opinion this black and white retoric that is being spewed is rediculous,and far from the whole picture.

In my opinion If you buy something be it a book, a cd, amovie, you will never convince the vast majority of the world it isn't fair that i can convert it from one medium to another no matter what private interest group gets a law pushed thru in some country that states otherwise


----------



## BarakO (Sep 10, 2005)

DonTadow said:
			
		

> I slammed CMP in the last thread because I believe you make profit off of easily created items with the datapacks.




Huh?  That's the most absurd thing I've ever heard (excuse me, the sentiment behind it is absurd, not the actual statement since that's probably completely true).  

People can make hamburgers too, that's pretty simple, but there are millions of burger joints in the world.  Do you object to them too?

What's your objection to a company making money for doing something that people would rather part with their money for rather than their time?


----------



## DonTadow (Sep 10, 2005)

BarakO said:
			
		

> Huh?  That's the most absurd thing I've ever heard (excuse me, the sentiment behind it is absurd, not the actual statement since that's probably completely true).
> 
> People can make hamburgers too, that's pretty simple, but there are millions of burger joints in the world.  Do you object to them too?
> 
> What's your objection to a company making money for doing something that people would rather part with their money for rather than their time?



I"m sorry, taken as just that, it sounds absurd.  But you have to know the whole system.  What if there was just mcdonalds, and even though stan could make a better burger, he's not allowed to make a better burger for their program.  Forget about selling that burger, he's not even allowed to make the burger and give it away.  

Thats what gets me steamed.  AT this pace companies will start claiming IP for any translation, any parody, any cliff note like taking.  The bigger companies don't even have to be right, they only have to have the money to either A. buy expensive lawyers, (WOTC) or B. buy their competitors outright (EA). 

as far as etools, In the beginning there were lots of datapacks floating around and the programming for etools was simple, but CMP has made it more and more difficult to put things into system let alone share it.  I happened to be on e-tools yahoo forum, and they even threatened to shut their own user community down. Lets kick those people who bought our stuff in the face.


----------



## drakhe (Sep 10, 2005)

*Hear hear!*



			
				rom90125 said:
			
		

> Azhrei,
> 
> Thanks for taking the time to post.  I, for one, enjoyed the informal lesson.





Hear hear! 
I've always admired people with the ability (and the will to make the effort) 
to write a clear statement as Azhrei did!


----------



## Kirin'Tor (Sep 10, 2005)

DonTadow said:
			
		

> as far as etools, In the beginning there were lots of datapacks floating around and the programming for etools was simple, but CMP has made it more and more difficult to put things into system let alone share it.  I happened to be on e-tools yahoo forum, and they even threatened to shut their own user community down. Lets kick those people who bought our stuff in the face.




These statements are obviously comming from someone whos eigher [or both] (A) never used eTools, or only used it once (B) just trying to make eTools look bad, for whatever reasons.

It's easier than ever to add user data to eTools, CMP has even worked with a certin individual who's made external editors for eT, because that's what the users want. The last few updates to the eTools program have added both more user interfaces (the built in class editor) and more functionality to support user additionions (almost nothing is hard coded, so nearly any data can be added). I don't care how many vague and blanket statements you make out into the air, but the minute you start lying through your teeth, then that's where this stops being a debate, and starts being something else entirely.

Lets just ignore the whole 'IP' issue, and start talking about the real issue. You'rea writer of soem form, DonTadow. I don't know what kind, but I'm going to make soem assumptions, so please don't peg me on not knowing exactly what you write...

I'm going to assume that you write weekly articles for some form of peroidical (paper, magazine, web, etc.). I'm also going to assume you get paid some amount, based on sales of access to that periodical (or perhaps you sell your column directly to consumers). 

How would you feel if I scanned and copied your article, and just stared sending free copies to all of your clients? Would that worry your bottom line?

Or, to be closer in example, say you'd been given exclusive rights to write novelizations of movie scripts, from a specific company, say WB ('because it's short)? Let's also assume you pay a 15% royalty to the script's writer, and you can keep the rest (excluding publishing cost and whatnot). How would react if you found out someone _else_ was novelizing those scripts, and not only were they just as logical as yours, but they were giving them away free? Would you sit back and watch your profits dwindle? (All while your exclusive, totally legal, lisence was being ignored? Waht would you expect WB to do in that case?

This isn't about big evil corporation stomping out competition, it's about an upstart that got lucky to hit a big contract (well, big in that's it's exclusive and from WotC) and is defending it's right to earn a profit. This agruement isn't about IP at all...it's about quelling one guy who like's to control threads and flame entire companies based on ... what seems to be no expirence with them, no use or their product, and nothing more than malice.


----------



## bloodydrake (Sep 10, 2005)

Kirin'Tor said:
			
		

> Lets just ignore the whole 'IP' issue, and start talking about the real issue. You'rea writer of soem form, DonTadow. I don't know what kind, but I'm going to make soem assumptions, so please don't peg me on not knowing exactly what you write...
> 
> I'm going to assume that you write weekly articles for some form of peroidical (paper, magazine, web, etc.). I'm also going to assume you get paid some amount, based on sales of access to that periodical (or perhaps you sell your column directly to consumers).
> 
> How would you feel if I scanned and copied your article, and just stared sending free copies to all of your clients? Would that worry your bottom line?




But the point is it won't affect his bottom line if the people all paid for the paper/magazine in the first place..they already bought it, there is no loss of revenue,and aslong as you only shared this media transfer with paid subscribers that already own it there is no harm done.

NO one is advocating giving anything to people that haven't already paid for something.
The only thing this is lost is the potential to stick it to the end consumer twice for the samething..and the only way thats realistic is if the manufacture had to spend resources doing it..if its done by the end user it doesn't cost them anything.

I can scan any article i want for my own personal use that i've paid for..so can the other 50 people that all bought it..but if we work together to do it collectivelly to cut down on the leg work suddenly your doing somethiing wrong..

You know what i'd like to see. Companies work on a way to facilitate fair use thats secure. and protects against blatent theft.Fight the piracy of actual material not punish those that paid for it.


----------



## DonTadow (Sep 10, 2005)

Kirin'Tor said:
			
		

> These statements are obviously comming from someone whos eigher [or both] (A) never used eTools, or only used it once (B) just trying to make eTools look bad, for whatever reasons.
> 
> It's easier than ever to add user data to eTools, CMP has even worked with a certin individual who's made external editors for eT, because that's what the users want. The last few updates to the eTools program have added both more user interfaces (the built in class editor) and more functionality to support user additionions (almost nothing is hard coded, so nearly any data can be added). I don't care how many vague and blanket statements you make out into the air, but the minute you start lying through your teeth, then that's where this stops being a debate, and starts being something else entirely.
> 
> ...



Happens all the time, its called a wire.  And I have no say so what story gets picked up or when it gets picked up on the wire.  Plus stories get linked, posted and printed on websites all the time.  Its the nature of the business.  

But this isn't about scanning books and putting them as pdfs.  This is about making scripts of classes and feats based on published books to share with other owners of the books and the program whom don't have scripting capabilities.  The argument sounds silly.  Its ok to send it to another friend but once you find away to send it to a bunch of friends its wrong?  What if one friend sends it to one friend ect.  

Again no ones advocating stealing any content they didnt pay for.  I'm not even displaying my views on sharing music and books.  Im worried about trying to include minor programs, scripts and notes into this ip argument.  Then getting on the forums and salem witching groups and people because of your own views.  Yahoo closed the forum soley on word of mouth as they had no idea how to check if there was ip in the scripts considering you'd have to have an understanding of programming to go through each one.  

Don't kid yourself.  This is every bit about big companies preventing innovation in the name of profit.  

Scriptiing easier in e-tools? Obviously never used anything else.


----------



## kingpaul (Sep 11, 2005)

DonTadow said:
			
		

> What does CMP have to do with DM genie.  Last i heard you wern't a fan of the program.



Haven't you read Mynex's posts? He's stated that he uses DMGenie.


			
				DonTadow said:
			
		

> I slammed CMP in the last thread because I believe you make profit off of easily created items with the datapacks.



And what's wrong with that? Its been stated before that you can create the datasets for yourself. Its the distribution that's the issue


			
				DonTadow said:
			
		

> HOwever, this thread is about the actions I believe you guys did to have the yahoo group shut down (which you have not denyed).



http://www.enworld.org/showpost.php?p=2556886&postcount=33


			
				DonTadow said:
			
		

> If this was a crime youd be the first suspects, simply because of the irate nature of your remarks only a month ago. You showed anger towards the community and it was noted a few times that you were quite upset. Plus, again, you're on a forum about a program you also stated was inferior to your own, that you do not like.



I, for one, have not been angry. I do not use DMGenie, its true, but I don't recall ever saying that it was inferior. And, as I stated above, Mynex himself has stated that he uses DMGenie. The issue towards the DMGenie community you were discussing in the other thread was the fact that WotC's IP was being distributed without permission.


			
				DonTadow said:
			
		

> SUre ,it could be just a big coinecodence.  But its a heck of a one.  Plus agin reading your remarks, it doesnt sound like you're denying any involvement.



I've already given the link to Mynex's post on this comment. Now, let me post mine:

I had nothing to do with Yahoo!'s decision to close down that group or to delete the owner's account


			
				DonTadow said:
			
		

> Far from the contrary, your remarks on here are more of a "good ridance i'm glad thats gone , they were criminals on there". Looking back on the thread, theres not one remark showing that you have any interest in what happened to the forum only to see how people reacted that it was gone and comment about how bad it was anyway.



The only piece of the group that I recall being discussed was the distribution of WotC's IP.


----------



## kingpaul (Sep 11, 2005)

azhrei_fje said:
			
		

> Having said all that, scanning a book and distributing a PDF is illegal.  (However, it is not "theft", or "stealing", or "piracy".  It is "copyright infringement".



Alright, consider me properly edumacated on the proper terminology. (And I realize you aren't a lawyer).

Now, from your understanding of the law (still recognizing the fact that you aren't a lawyer), how do the courts look at the four mentioned crimes? IOW, which is the most severe?


----------



## kingpaul (Sep 11, 2005)

DonTadow said:
			
		

> Thats what gets me steamed.



As far as I know, and I'm not an agent of CMP, CMP's license to distribute datasets is not exclusive.


			
				DonTadow said:
			
		

> as far as etools, In the beginning there were lots of datapacks floating around and the programming for etools was simple, but CMP has made it more and more difficult to put things into system let alone share it.  I happened to be on e-tools yahoo forum, and they even threatened to shut their own user community down. Lets kick those people who bought our stuff in the face.



Um, the programming was not as clean as it is now since CMP has taken over. Countless bugs have been ironed out and numerous features have been added in. The issue, once again, is the distribution of IP.


----------



## kingpaul (Sep 11, 2005)

bloodydrake said:
			
		

> The only thing this is lost is the potential to stick it to the end consumer twice for the samething



But a dataset is not a book, they are different mediums.


----------



## DonTadow (Sep 11, 2005)

kingpaul said:
			
		

> Haven't you read Mynex's posts? He's stated that he uses DMGenie.
> 
> And what's wrong with that? Its been stated before that you can create the datasets for yourself. Its the distribution that's the issue
> 
> ...




I have read the statement, and though its some great dancing, he doesnt not flatout deny it.  There are several similiar dancing statements above.  And honestly, if their policy is preventing the distrubtion of ip, why would they care if someone says it was them or not.  From their statements, it would be like someone accusing you of saving a baby from a fire or stopping a theift ring.  

The problem I have with the datasets is that it is like someone selling premium air, but only allowing you to buy air from them.  It's jut something wrong to sell something that you are already have access to and that someone with scripting knowlwedge would be glad for you to do freely.  

The problem is not creating the datasets it is sharing them with friends which has been the problem.  It was only a few days ago i was on the etools forum and someone from cmg threatened to shut their own community forum down.  Am I to believe that if they woulddo this to their own community they are beyond shutting down a rival program's community website.  

Which brings me to something i find odd?  Etools and dmgenie does the same thing?  Outside of seeing what the competition is doing, am i to believe that someone whom works for cmp really uses dmgenie especially considering the two are not compatible (at least not without a script that would essentially violate etools ip) .  Is this not hte equivelent of the CEO of Mcdonalds telling the media he enjoys a good Burger King burger.


----------



## kingpaul (Sep 11, 2005)

DonTadow said:
			
		

> This is about making scripts of classes and feats based on published books to share with other owners of the books and the program whom don't have scripting capabilities.



Which is, once again, distributing the IP.


			
				DonTadow said:
			
		

> Yahoo closed the forum soley on word of mouth as they had no idea how to check if there was ip in the scripts considering you'd have to have an understanding of programming to go through each one.



Really? Do you have a link stating that Yahoo closed a group without any thing to go on but a request? I'd like to see that.


			
				DonTadow said:
			
		

> Don't kid yourself.  This is every bit about big companies preventing innovation in the name of profit.



So, in your opinion, a company shouldn't care if their IP is being distributed without their authorization?


			
				DonTadow said:
			
		

> Scriptiing easier in e-tools? Obviously never used anything else.



I believe he was referring to the fact that its easier now in eTools than it once was. I don't believe he was making a comparison to other CharGens.


----------



## kingpaul (Sep 11, 2005)

DonTadow said:
			
		

> From their statements, it would be like someone accusing you of saving a baby from a fire or stopping a theift ring.



I'm honestly not understanding your statement here.


			
				DonTadow said:
			
		

> The problem I have with the datasets is that it is like someone selling premium air, but only allowing you to buy air from them.  It's jut something wrong to sell something that you are already have access to and that someone with scripting knowlwedge would be glad for you to do freely.



So you think its wrong to charge for person A to sell you something they did?

And once again, we come back to the distribution of IP.


			
				DonTadow said:
			
		

> The problem is not creating the datasets it is sharing them with friends which has been the problem.  It was only a few days ago i was on the etools forum and someone from cmg threatened to shut their own community forum down.  Am I to believe that if they woulddo this to their own community they are beyond shutting down a rival program's community website.



Alright, you've now stated that sharing the datasets is the problem, which is correct.

Now, its CMP, not CMG. CMG is Creative Mountain Games, and I don't think they have any stake in this discussion (but I could be wrong).

I don't know what forum you're talking about. The only CMP forums I'm aware of the ones on their website: http://www.codemonkeypublishing.com/ Which one are you referring to?


			
				DonTadow said:
			
		

> Which brings me to something i find odd?  Etools and dmgenie does the same thing?  Outside of seeing what the competition is doing, am i to believe that someone whom works for cmp really uses dmgenie especially considering the two are not compatible (at least not without a script that would essentially violate etools ip) .  Is this not hte equivelent of the CEO of Mcdonalds telling the media he enjoys a good Burger King burger.



I don't know Mynex's gaming habits, but he has stated for a while now on the CMP forums when questions come up for comparison, that he uses DMGenie.


----------



## DonTadow (Sep 11, 2005)

kingpaul said:
			
		

> Which is, once again, distributing the IP.
> 
> Really? Do you have a link stating that Yahoo closed a group without any thing to go on but a request? I'd like to see that.
> 
> ...



All I have is the person whom owned the forum and his blog.  I dont think he has a reason to lie.

Again, I"m not going to get in on what is ip and what is not.  I and a million other people dont believe it is so.   There's little difference between it and cliff notes or a literary review.  Its murky legal area and wont' be solved for sometme.  What is IP what isnt IP.  when its comfy its profitable its IP, when its not its not IP.  You can lend it to a friend but not to friends on the internet.  I can write a review and quote for 100s but can't can't make notes for 10 or 20.  I can't write a program that is majroity my own creation inspired by another work?  Problem is, iin every case that rejects the concept of IP you find it is because previous precedents.


----------



## DonTadow (Sep 11, 2005)

kingpaul said:
			
		

> I'm honestly not understanding your statement here.
> 
> So you think its wrong to charge for person A to sell you something they did?
> 
> ...




In other words, CMP and its employees, at least on enworld, have made a big stench about stopping the spread of others IP.  Well the forum shutting down should be seen as a victory by them.  However, they seem offended to be accused of having something to do with it.  Which is ironic considering techincally I"m accusing htem of doing what they would deem " a good deed".  

Etools had a forum on yahoo that was threatened to be shut down only days before the masters of the djinn shut down.  Yahoo is also the home of the masters of the djinn forum. 

What I think is wrong, and every american should, is eliminating competition.  Drives up prices and prevents creativity.  
 sorry meant cmp.  CMG are some cool peeps with good products.


----------



## Mynex (Sep 11, 2005)

*Enough*

1. I wasn't referring to international IP laws, if I was, I would have said "International IP Laws" - Tadow and myself are both in the US, so I'm going by US IP laws.

2. I didn't 'rat fink' out the DM Genie Y! Group.  Period.  I didn't report them to Y!,  the IP isn't mine, I'm not the "IP Police in full riot gear" and I really, really don't give a rat's ass about it.

3. I spoke up about IP distribution in a factual manner, and I've been attacked, accused, slandered for it, personally and my company.  And where are the mods for this?  No where to be found.  Which tells me that EN World is still anti-CMP for whatever reason.  In light of that, I no longer feel the need to 'restrain my comments'.

4. In the vein of not restraining my comments, if you share IP material with the express intent of not supporting the company that produces it, you're a thief.  that's MY opinion.  And if you don't like it, tough .  It's _MY_ opinion.

5. Nathan (DonTadow) has made insinuations and accusation against CMP, that we have a hidden agenda, that we produce shoddy material, that we're out to screw the gamer... and his story has changed each time I present logic that's not the case... arguing logic vs idiocy is pointless.  And let me be clear so there's no misunderstanding, _I_ think, in my _OPINION_ that you're a freakin troll.  Further, you can't argue logically that you're in the right, because you know you're in the wrong, that you have an indefensible position, so instead of shutting the hell up, you continue to talk out of your ass and try to make this my or CMP's fault.

Bad news for ya buddy, you're the idiot that made a post on a public forum, where the publisher of the IP DOES read, that the Y! group that got shut down was a good place to get IP material.  Granted, you didn't say 'IP', but go back and read your own freaking post dumbass.  YOU told a publisher (or several) that their IP material was being distributed _illegally in the US_ on a Y! Group.

so instead of dropping the subject, you try to make it someone else's fault?  pathetic AND stupid.

6.  Yes, I use DM Genie.  I also use DM's Familiar, Redblade, and a few others.  Why?  Because there is not _one_ program that oes everything _I_ as a _GM_ need it to do.  Yet.

Not to mention, competetion breeds innovation.  I'm all for there being a ton of character generators, a ton of campaign management utilities, and a ton of >insert type here< utilities... the more the merrier as far as I'm concerned... why?  Because I _know_ there is not one single tool that is to every person's liking.  Some like their information presented X way, some prefer Y way, and still others prefer A, B, & Z ways...  That's called reality.

I also come from an Open Source background (hello!  3 years donated to working on the Open Source PCGen project!).  I'm all for information being shared, being able to be used between programs, and the like... However, I do NOT accept that distribution of IP is something that _SHOULD_ be done.  I do NOT accept the argument that "I bought the book, the data should be free"... 

Why?

Because data sets take time to create.  They take time to maintain.  And that time is paid for by CMP to it's contractors.  You aren't paing for the freaking information, you're paying for the work that went into their creation and maintence.  So don't give me any sorry ass argument about content being the same and you should get it for free... that's crap, it's a crap argument, and you damned well know it.

You stated that you _never_ ecouraged anyone to break the law... !!! You did, directly, state that you were going to tell your friends to leave up their file sharing programs to distribute CMP's data files.

You are not only arguing in the wrong, you are a liar.

Enough already.  I'm sick of YOUR holier than thou attitude towards me and CMP.  I've had a lot of _publishers_ tell me this argument isn't worth it... this _specific_ thread (and the other one) wasn't worth it... that basically they don't participate in these discussions because of idiots like you.

I despise leaving an argument unfinished... it rankles me... but ya know what?  your oblivious, and obvious stupidity in the face of straight up logical arguments is exactly why I am going to leave this argument.

So go ahead and say you've 'won the fight for the little man'.

And watch as software, of all varieties, gets stricter and stricter controls and more and better security processes.  All because of jackasses like yourself.

And you've ensured, and proven to me, that EN World is no place for CMP.  That to be treated with respect and politeness is too much to be asked for as a company around here by some people.
.


----------



## azhrei_fje (Sep 11, 2005)

kingpaul said:
			
		

> Now, from your understanding of the law (still recognizing the fact that you aren't a lawyer), how do the courts look at the four mentioned crimes? IOW, which is the most severe?



Hmm, good question, King.  I hadn't really thought about it.

Right now, the pendulum is swinging towards prosecuting IP infringement more severely than theft.  The U.S. courts just put the CEO of Enron in jail for 25 years (although he's made a motion to be released pending his appeal, expected to take 12 months to begin).  But he's being made an example.

A thief can rob a store at gunpoint (armed robbery) and do at least 5 years (in Florida, where I live) even if no one is hurt and the robbery fails.  But someone who faxes a page out of book to a friend and gets the fax number wrong, sending the fax to the publisher/author (!), could be sentenced to federal prison for 10 years or more!

Granted, it's unlikely that faxing a single page would cause a judge to sentence jail time.  But that's part of the problem with the IP laws in the U.S. -- they are SO up to interpretation by the courts that they are practically useless.

I will take a look over the next few days and see what's currently happening in this regard.  If this thread is still alive, I'll post my findings.  I don't have a Pacer account, but I have friends who are lawyers (hmm, don't take that wrong! :\) and they can check for me.

Of course, if they look something up and provide it to me, is that IP infringement?  Shouldn't I have to pay to look it up myself? <big grin!>


----------



## Dinkeldog (Sep 11, 2005)

Mynex said:
			
		

> The insults, accusations, insinuations, and flat out declarations of theft of IP being 'Okay' are unacceptable.
> 
> But I suppose I shouldn't be surprised.  Seems that a lot of unacceptable behaviour is allowed when it's directed at us, so I should be used to it by now.
> 
> *shrug* Whatever.




Believe it or not, until the thread was reported last night, we didn't know this thread existed.  Unacceptable behavior is not allowed when it's directed at you, either.  Report threads.  Obviously not every report will be resolved to your satisfaction, but if you don't report, we frequently don't know.


----------



## Dinkeldog (Sep 11, 2005)

DonTadow said:
			
		

> In other words, CMP and its employees, at least on enworld, have made a big stench about stopping the spread of others IP.  Well the forum shutting down should be seen as a victory by them.  However, they seem offended to be accused of having something to do with it.  Which is ironic considering techincally I"m accusing htem of doing what they would deem " a good deed".




ENWorld has always stated that it opposes piracy of material, as well.  We also don't like people giving instructions on how to pirate material from here, and those threads are always closed.

This thread has turned quite nasty, and I'm going to close it on those grounds.


----------

