Post/Author/DateTime	Post
XMasterX 11-14-04, 11:34 AM	on a first note, this is purly out of curiosity, i am not planning on doing this(if its not legal), i just think it would be cool... would it be considered copyright infringment(sp?) if you took the storyline and map from say the Baldur's Gate PC Game, and formed it into a DnD Campaign? again i say im not about to do this but i just thought it would be cooll if it were allowed, i personally loved the BG storyline and layout thanks
Thorak 11-14-04, 11:39 AM	on a first note, this is purly out of curiosity, i am not planning on doing this(if its not legal), i just think it would be cool... would it be considered copyright infringment(sp?) if you took the storyline and map from say the Baldur's Gate PC Game, and formed it into a DnD Campaign? again i say im not about to do this but i just thought it would be cooll if it were allowed, i personally loved the BG storyline and layout thanks It's only copyright infringement if you A> publish it, B> claim it's yours in a public way, or C> try to sell things related to it. None of which are likely in a normal campaign. Copyright doesn't prevent you from using stuff, it just prevents you from benefiting financially from it or claiming that it's yours.
Solaris 11-14-04, 03:10 PM	It's only copyright infringement if you A> publish it, B> claim it's yours in a public way, or C> try to sell things related to it. None of which are likely in a normal campaign. Copyright doesn't prevent you from using stuff, it just prevents you from benefiting financially from it or claiming that it's yours. Nope. Copyright grants to the holder the exclusive rights of reproduction and derivation. It's just that nobody is likely to notice (or care) about a derivative work as long as it's for personal use and isn't distributed publically. See http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html
Edymnion 11-14-04, 03:29 PM	Go ahead. Its just you and your buddies, and its not like you're giving them pirate copies of the actual game. We all steal ideas for campaigns left and right, so don't worry about it :)
Thorak 11-14-04, 03:50 PM	Nope. Copyright grants to the holder the exclusive rights of reproduction and derivation. It's just that nobody is likely to notice (or care) about a derivative work as long as it's for personal use and isn't distributed publically. You're right. You can't, say, photocopy an entire book. You can freely reference characters, photocopy an entire chapter, etc, etc, though. The one thing I missed is that Copyright means you can't reproduce in great part anything of the copyrighted material. In this case, using plot and characters from BG in no way breaches copyright; you're not taking everything, and you're reworking it.
Solaris 11-14-04, 04:03 PM	In this case, using plot and characters from BG in no way breaches copyright; you're not taking everything, and you're reworking it. That's making a derivative work, and it is copyright infringement.
Ourph the Mingol 11-14-04, 04:09 PM	That's making a derivative work, and it is copyright infringement. No, drawing inspiration from a copyrighted work for private use is covered under the fair use clause, which makes it perfectly legal.
Solaris 11-14-04, 04:10 PM	No, drawing inspiration from a copyrighted work for private use is covered under the fair use clause, which makes it perfectly legal. Using the characters from a copyrighted work is likely to be infringement, unless it's covered by something like parody which would fall under fair use. http://www.chillingeffects.org/derivative/faq.cgi#QID383 Fair use is described here: http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html Lifting characters and settings wholesale and making your own derivative work doesn't qualify. Of course, as I pointed out, nobody's likely to notice or care about this. But it is, technically, copyright infringement.
Solaris 11-14-04, 04:39 PM	There seems to be a lot of confusion around here about what constitutes copyright infringement and fair use. Where are you guys getting this stuff?
crazysamaritan 11-14-04, 04:40 PM	Interesting, EVERY copyrighted work I've seen, that has the intent of being used, includes a sentance, or paragragh to the effect of: It's our stuff, but if you keep it private, it's your business, not ours.
Solaris 11-14-04, 04:44 PM	Interesting, EVERY copyrighted work I've seen, that has the intent of being used, includes a sentance, or paragragh to the effect of: It's our stuff, but if you keep it private, it's your business, not ours. Yeah, a lot of copyright holders do explicitly grant limited personal use. But if they don't grant it, the right doesn't exist. You'll see it with, for example, character sheets, which you're allowed to photocopy. But I doubt (though I haven't checked) that Baldur's gate came with a notice granting the right to use the characters and setting for derivative works. In fact, http://www.bioware.com/legal/copyright.html BALDUR'S GATE: © 1998 BioWare Corp. All Rights Reserved. Baldur's Gate, Forgotten Realms, the Forgotten Realms logo, Advanced Dungeons & Dragons, the AD&D logo, and the TSR logo are trademarks of TSR, Inc., a subsidiary of Wizards of the Coast, Inc, and are used by Interplay under license. All Rights Reserved.... and http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=books/main/submissions Please note that all the books Wizards of the Coast publishes are protected by copyright. No one can write original material using the characters, place names, etc., from these worlds except -- in the case of Wizards of the Coast-owned worlds -- for publication by Wizards of the Coast on a work-for-hire basis.
Lanky Ogre Baggy Pants 11-14-04, 04:54 PM	Many of the characters, the entire setting,and many of the ideas are already in use in Dragon Magazine articles, and the FR books. For things that aren't directly D&D related, many of the authors/publicists will give you permission to use it privately if you ask. I know that Mercedes Lackey and Raymond E.Feist have both given this permission.
Solaris 11-14-04, 05:10 PM	Many of the characters, the entire setting,and many of the ideas are already in use in Dragon Magazine articles, and the FR books. Most of which will be copyright... For things that aren't directly D&D related, many of the authors/publicists will give you permission to use it privately if you ask. I know that Mercedes Lackey and Raymond E.Feist have both given this permission. That's cool. It all seems a bit silly, though. I mean, if it's private, nobody is going to know about it, nobody will feel that their rights are being infringed. Still, it is nice that some people are inclined to be open about this stuff. Even WotC isn't as bad as TSR was in the bad old days when they discovered the internet and began a long campaign of shutting down every personal D&D-related site they could find. Now we have the OGL, though even that suffers from some trademark issues (mind flayers, etc). But trademarks, unlike copyright, have to be defended or they can be lost. But that's another kettle of fish... Just rambling.
Lanky Ogre Baggy Pants 11-14-04, 05:27 PM	Quote: Originally Posted by Lanky Ogre Baggy Pants Many of the characters, the entire setting,and many of the ideas are already in use in Dragon Magazine articles, and the FR books. Most of which will be copyright... I guess I don't understand what you mean. Dragon Magazine and the FR books are produced by Paizo publishing and WotC for use in D&D games. How does them being copyrighted matter for purposes of playing?
Solaris 11-14-04, 05:34 PM	I guess I don't understand what you mean. Dragon Magazine and the FR books are produced by Paizo publishing and WotC for use in D&D games. How does them being copyrighted matter for purposes of playing? I thought we were talking about creating derivative works. Like, making a campaign setting or something. I might have read too much into it, but since the question was asked in the first place, I assumed there'd be some kind of work created which could potentially infringe copyright.
Thorak 11-14-04, 05:43 PM	Creating derivative works is only copyright infringement if it's made available to the publc, or you derive financial gain, or you claim ownership of the copyrighted bits. If you made and published an unofficial "Baldur's Gate" campaign, you'd be violating copyright. You do not violate it by writing your own campaign for your friends. That's "fair use".
Solaris 11-14-04, 06:01 PM	Creating derivative works is only copyright infringement if it's made available to the publc, or you derive financial gain, or you claim ownership of the copyrighted bits. If you made and published an unofficial "Baldur's Gate" campaign, you'd be violating copyright. You do not violate it by writing your own campaign for your friends. That's "fair use". Well, that doesn't seem to be fair use as defined in any of the links I've provided, so you're at odds with the government and others who have commented on it. The right to reproduce and to grant reproduction rights belongs solely to the copyright holder. Certain types of reproduction fall under "fair use" -- these are described in one of the links I provided, and private use does not seem to be one of them. Photocopying an entire book, for example, is not fair use, even if you never show it to anyone else. But if you do it, nobody is ever going to know. Using characters from a copyrighted work is not fair use, except as described under the appropriate section of copyright law. But if you do it for private use, nobody is ever going to know, and even if you publicize it, it's possible nobody will care (witness all the terrible fan-fiction out there). If you try to sell it, then someone will probably care. But these levels of knowledge and caring have no relevance to the issue of whether or not it's technically legal.
Nithendil 11-14-04, 06:04 PM	Seeing how bioware's NWN mod creation is the epitome of derivative "copyright infringment" and they have yet to complain or take down mods of Baldurs Gate 3, Sunless Citadel, etc, I honestly doubt they would care.
Morwen 11-14-04, 06:47 PM	I thought we were talking about creating derivative works. Like, making a campaign setting or something. It appears to me as if he's just asking if it could somehow be against some obscure law to use characters from the computer game in his campaign. Not that he is intending to write a campaign setting for publishing.
Dave Stebbins 11-14-04, 08:00 PM	Creating derivative works is only copyright infringement if it's made available to the publc, or you derive financial gain, or you claim ownership of the copyrighted bits. I believe the latter two make no difference. If you publish something derived from someone else's copyrighted work without permission, it is copyright infringement, whether you make money or claim ownership or not. Another good site for reference is "10 Big Myths About Copyright Explained": http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html
crazysamaritan 11-14-04, 08:10 PM	Solaris, since you seem to be so interested in the law, I went through one of the links.... In determining whether any work is eligible to be considered a work made for hire under paragraph (2), neither the amendment contained in section 1011(d) of the Intellectual Property and Communications Omnibus Reform Act of 1999, as enacted by section 1000(a)(9) of Public Law 106-113, nor the deletion of the words added by that amendment — (A) shall be considered or otherwise given any legal significance, or (B) shall be interpreted to indicate congressional approval or disapproval of, or acquiescence in, any judicial determination, It looks to me that a work is only considered "work" if it has been publicated. Therefore, creating a "derivitive work", and not going through "publication" means he can use it as much as he wants. Which is why you're allowed to write stories about Sonic and Splinter and Samwise in elementary school. You're not publicating it, therefore it does not constitute actual "work".
Thorak 11-14-04, 11:50 PM	I believe the latter two make no difference. If you publish something derived from someone else's copyrighted work without permission, it is copyright infringement, whether you make money or claim ownership or not. Another good site for reference is "10 Big Myths About Copyright Explained": http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html Nope. I can publish, say, a graduate thesis quoting heavily from someone else's published books or thesis. So long as I keep the quoted elements to withing what's reasonable, I can publish it just fine without infringing on copyright. OR asking permission. I know someone who had a professor threaten legal action in just this kind of a case, and the case never went to court because there was no basis for it. Of course, I'm talking about Canadian copyright, which may be slightly different. For instance, I also know that professors are legally allowed to photocopy and hand out up to a chapter out of any text, without infringing on copyright, because that's again "fair use". Any more, and they'd infringe. And using the plot as a rough draft of your campaign is going to fall under that same policy. You're not taking a great deal of info, and you could even publish the campaign on the web (or print, but that would be silly) and so long as you cite which bits you took from the game, there's no legal basis for copyright infringement. Unless you're trying to imply that every university essay ever written is copyright infringement. Since they tend to quote heavily, without explicit permission, from many texts.
caeruleus 11-15-04, 12:07 AM	This is why I prefer copyleft (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyleft).
Ourph the Mingol 11-15-04, 03:45 PM	Well, that doesn't seem to be fair use as defined in any of the links I've provided, so you're at odds with the government and others who have commented on it. The right to reproduce and to grant reproduction rights belongs solely to the copyright holder. Certain types of reproduction fall under "fair use" -- these are described in one of the links I provided, and private use does not seem to be one of them. Photocopying an entire book, for example, is not fair use, even if you never show it to anyone else. But if you do it, nobody is ever going to know. Using characters from a copyrighted work is not fair use, except as described under the appropriate section of copyright law. But if you do it for private use, nobody is ever going to know, and even if you publicize it, it's possible nobody will care (witness all the terrible fan-fiction out there). If you try to sell it, then someone will probably care. But these levels of knowledge and caring have no relevance to the issue of whether or not it's technically legal. Are you trying to be dense or do you really not understand the original poster's question? Using copyrighted material as inspiration (including using proper names, etc.) for a private home D&D campaign is not publishing or reproduction. It does NOT violate copyright laws. By your definition of "derivative work" anyone using the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting while playing D&D is in violation of copyright law the minute they write ANYTHING down for their personal campaign. For example: There is a small village called Thorpeville located twenty miles south of Heliogabalus in the land of Damara. There is a small temple dedicated to Torm in the village. The cleric at the temple is looking for help in clearing out a band of goblins that threaten the village. By your definition, if I write something like that down for my campaign, I'm violating copyright, because my statement uses copyrighted names such as Heliogabalus, Damara and Torm. In fact, by your definition I'm violating copyright by typing them in this post. That interpretation of copyrights is NOT supported by case law. It is clear from numerous cases that such a creation, if intended for private use and not for sale or distribution, is covered by fair use and is completely legal. The actions outlined by the original poster in this thread are also legal for the same reasons. People tend to severely misunderstand the relationship between publisher and consumer as it regards copyright. Ownership of published ideas is not an inherent right, it's a privelege granted to publishers by the law. Use and creation are inherent rights of consumers, which have been limited in very specific ways by the copyright law. It is the responsibility of the courts to interpret the copyright laws with a bias toward the freedom of the consumer, NOT toward the protection of the publisher. In other words, unless the copyright laws specifically forbid an action or use to a consumer, the consumer is entitled to that action or use. You won't find anything in the copyright laws forbidding someone from making personal notes containing copyrighted names or text.
Edymnion 11-15-04, 04:22 PM	By your definition, if I write something like that down for my campaign, I'm violating copyright, because my statement uses copyrighted names such as Heliogabalus, Damara and Torm.Just as a side note, you can't copywrite a name. You can trademark it, but not copywrite it.
Palin the Wizard 11-15-04, 04:53 PM	Ugh. What's with the increased use of 'copywrite'? It's not a word. You copyright something. It's a verb as well as a noun.
Thailfi 11-15-04, 05:21 PM	Who cares if what he is doing is actually illegal? For you to get in trouble the owner of the copyright would have to be able to show that either you received financial gain or that you deprived them of financial gain from the infringement. There is no way they will be able to do that with what the original poster had in mind. By the way in my 24 years of D&D, we have done something like this (blatantly rip off of a computer game or published novel for D&D use) on more than one occaision.
Dave Stebbins 11-15-04, 06:00 PM	Nope. I can publish, say, a graduate thesis quoting heavily from someone else's published books or thesis. So long as I keep the quoted elements to withing what's reasonable, I can publish it just fine without infringing on copyright. OR asking permission. Which is covered by the 'fair use' portion of copyright law. In my attempt at brevity, my answer was incomplete. For you to get in trouble the owner of the copyright would have to be able to show that either you received financial gain or that you deprived them of financial gain from the infringement. This is incorrect. For someone to win damages, one of those conditions must be met. But you can be sued to cease publication of an infringing work even if you're not making money off it.
Farland 11-15-04, 06:07 PM	This seems to me to be a "if a tree falls in the woods" question. I might go so far as to say that it is neither fair use nor a copyright infringement to make a Baldur's Gate-based world to play with your group. I think it is neither as long as it doesn't go past your table. If it is infringement, it is so abstract as to be ridiculous. Anyway, what defines copyright infringement but a court's ruling anyway, and no court would rule against you at all in this case. But neither is it perfectly legal. It is gray. Once it goes past your table, however, it is another story. I am not a lawyer.
SnowbearK 11-16-04, 12:53 AM	sigh...what it ultimately boils down to folks, are the two greatest "evils" in the world: Money & Ego, in that order. One of the major issues T$R had financially, is that they spent nearly a production run's profit in legal fees every month or so chasing down every single trademark & copyright infringement they found, even 10 year old kids with a webpage. Regardless of whether you're using it for your own group in the privacy of your own home, giving copies of chapters (say, the Mutants and Masterminds "Superpowers" chapter) to your players for character creation, etc. or if you're publishing it yourself and making thousands of dollars, rubles, pounds, marks, yen, or rupies off the copy, it...is...still...illegal...unless! you have the explicit permission of the copyright holder. The real questions then become: -Will the copyright holder find out? -Is my useage a threat to the copyright holder's bottom line? -Will the copyright holder consider my useage offensive enough to their Ego that they are willing to expend the funds necessary to sue my lowly arse into oblivion? -Will they simply send a C&D demand and leave it at that? The law has still been broken, regardless. It's up to the copyright holder to take action in most cases. Just because no action is taken, the copyright holder didn't find out, or you got a warning from them, doesn't mean you didn't break the law, it just means that you weren't punished for it and beaten, shot, hung, drawn and quartered, poisoned, stabbed, and then, just before your head dies, cry out that death is but a doorway, time is but a window, I'll be back! I do not condone breaking the law, but you have to understand the reality of the situation in any case. It's entirely possible that some executive's had a bad week, hasn't gotten any from their S.O. in a while, or ate some bad tex/mex and decides to take it out on some 17 year old with a hard drive full of copyrighted material who just happened to brag about it online by suing him and his parents into bankruptcy and then some. Odds are pretty slim, but you never know.
Thorak 11-16-04, 01:02 AM	Regardless of whether you're using it for your own group in the privacy of your own home, giving copies of chapters (say, the Mutants and Masterminds "Superpowers" chapter) to your players for character creation, etc. or if you're publishing it yourself and making thousands of dollars, rubles, pounds, marks, yen, or rupies off the copy, it...is...still...illegal...unless! you have the explicit permission of the copyright holder. Like I've said, it depends on how much you copy. A single chapter? Not copyright infringement. Professors do this all the time for their classes, and there's systems in place to ensure they're not breaking copyright. Several chapters would be, though. Fair use, again.
BronzeDragon 11-16-04, 01:08 AM	Even WotC isn't as bad as TSR was in the bad old days when they discovered the internet and began a long campaign of shutting down every personal D&D-related site they could find. Do you remember the editorial in CGW (Computer Gaming World) that was titled "Showdown on the electronic frontier", by Johnny Wilson, who later became editor of Dragon Magazine? It's still one of my all-time favorite papers on the subject. I keep the magazine stashed away in cherished remembrance... :D
Ranger REG 11-16-04, 03:04 AM	Like I've said, it depends on how much you copy. A single chapter? Not copyright infringement. Professors do this all the time for their classes, and there's systems in place to ensure they're not breaking copyright. Several chapters would be, though. Fair use, again. Professor can do that because Fair Use allow them for Educational Purpose. Fair Use also allow for Parody. Fair Use does NOT allow for Entertainment Purpose. See Fair Use Policy.
Arrowhen 11-16-04, 03:35 AM	XMasterX, take a look at your own sig: "According to these tests, I am a Chaotic Good Dwarven Fighter..." You shouldn't be worrying about the legalities, you should only be worrying about right and wrong. Let the stuffy Lawful Good and Lawful Neutral types worry about copyright this and fair use that... what you need to do is ask yourself if there's any plausable scenario in which the creators of Baldur's Gate would be somehow harmed by you creating a campaign out of their game for your own personal use. Of course they wouldn't. You already bought the game. You're not making copies of it and giving them to your friends. What you're really doing, when you get right down to it, is sitting around and talking about their game for several hours a week. If a bunch of little kids come out of a Star Wars movie and run around in the backyard staging mock lightsaber battles are they infringing on LucasArts' copyright? Sure, maybe you could get some soulless law-golem to agree that they are, but can you honestly say those kids are doing anything wrong? Of course not, and neither are you.
Thorak 11-16-04, 08:32 AM	Professor can do that because Fair Use allow them for Educational Purpose. Fair Use also allow for Parody. Fair Use does NOT allow for Entertainment Purpose. See Fair Use Policy. How about clause #4 in the linked Fair Use description? "4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work." Use for entertainment purposes among friends in an arena (pen and paper roleplaying) that the original work (a CRPG) doesn't cover clearly has absolutely no negative, and possible positive (by getting people interested enough to buy the game) effect on the potential market of the original work. It's fair use.
Palin the Wizard 11-16-04, 09:00 AM	How is it a 'work'? How are 'work' classified in terms of law? It hasn't been reproduced, and it hasn't been published. I fail to see where it could be illegal.
Dave Stebbins 11-16-04, 09:06 PM	How is it a 'work'? How are 'work' classified in terms of law? It hasn't been reproduced, and it hasn't been published. I fail to see where it could be illegal. The original post didn't mention whether it was to be used as a personal campaign or published. I think many of the posts discussing how the idea would infringe copyright were written using an unspoken "if you were to publish this..." qualifier. Then there were more general posts about copyright itself, which is where we started discussing 'infringing works.'
SnowbearK 11-16-04, 11:42 PM	How about clause #4 in the linked Fair Use description? "4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work." Use for entertainment purposes among friends in an arena (pen and paper roleplaying) that the original work (a CRPG) doesn't cover clearly has absolutely no negative, and possible positive (by getting people interested enough to buy the game) effect on the potential market of the original work. It's fair use. Not at all. The argument from the copyright holder's view would then be: It's a derivative work that could steer potential customers from the CRPG to the pen and paper rpg version, thus harming the copyright holder's bottom line. Think about both sides of the issue. Again what it boils down to is how much you anger the copyright holder's values, which are primarily about reputation & potential income. Sometimes it gets personal though, and then no amount of money is enough.
klyre 11-17-04, 11:56 AM	Not at all. The argument from the copyright holder's view would then be: It's a derivative work that could steer potential customers from the CRPG to the pen and paper rpg version, thus harming the copyright holder's bottom line. Think about both sides of the issue. Again what it boils down to is how much you anger the copyright holder's values, which are primarily about reputation & potential income. Sometimes it gets personal though, and then no amount of money is enough. By this reasoning, going to friends and telling them all the details about some movie you just saw is violating copyrights because now they're not going to want to go see it.
Thorak 11-17-04, 12:33 PM	By this reasoning, going to friends and telling them all the details about some movie you just saw is violating copyrights because now they're not going to want to go see it. Thanks, I was trying to think up a suitably ridiculous example to respond, but this works well. Especially since you can then extend it to reviewers, and I'm pretty sure movie reviews, even mentioning the title, the characters, and some of the plot, aren't violating copyright. Even if they tell the reader not to waste their money, and thus are clearly affecting the eventual profits, and are published in a for-profit medium.
Palin the Wizard 11-17-04, 02:25 PM	Remember, an idea or a concept cannot be copyrighted. Only the definition of an idea can.
XMasterX 11-17-04, 05:25 PM	So, in conclusion to this interesting debate...[hypethetically] if i took all the maps from the Baldur's Gate PC Game, and printed them out, and took a wlakthrough perhaps and wrote out the entire thing into a campaign, but used the books rules and remade the 'Bosses' similar to their BG form, but using book rules, and played out the entire thing, 'front to back', with my group at my house, clearly stating that this entire campaign came from the BG PC Game, and in no way claimed that i made it... YES or NO, would that be copyright infringment?
Aliquid 11-17-04, 06:27 PM	In this case I would certainly say "no" it is not a copyright infringement. I think people are failing to consider a few factors for this specific example. The world of Baldur's Gate, the towns, the terrain, the major characters, the character stats.... everything is based on P&P 2nd edition D&D. The "Forgotten Realms" world was created for the specific purpose of D&D players to utilize for their P&P needs. That is why it exists. It would be the same thing as with the current Eberon world. It isn't a copyright infringement for you to develop a campaign in the Eberon world... even if you use all the material from all the Eberon books printed, because that is why the books were printed in the first place. The only thing about Baldur's Gate that is actually original to the game is the plot. Everything else comes from P&P 2nd Edition D&D, and the "Forgotten Realms" supplements. So.... copying the maps would be ok, copying the cities would be ok, copying the different cultures and societies, and guilds etc would be ok.... copying the plot might be a slight infringement of copyright, depending on how you read the law. The thing is though... no-one would complain unless you tried to claim it was your idea or tried to make a profit from it.... so it doesn't matter either way.
Thorak 11-17-04, 09:37 PM	So, in conclusion to this interesting debate...[hypethetically] if i took all the maps from the Baldur's Gate PC Game, and printed them out, and took a wlakthrough perhaps and wrote out the entire thing into a campaign, but used the books rules and remade the 'Bosses' similar to their BG form, but using book rules, and played out the entire thing, 'front to back', with my group at my house, clearly stating that this entire campaign came from the BG PC Game, and in no way claimed that i made it... YES or NO, would that be copyright infringment? The only thing that really treads close to it is copying and printing out the maps. And even that is covered under "fair use", the same way a chapter in a book can be photocopied.
SnowbearK 11-18-04, 12:50 AM	Thorak & Klyre>> Just a note, suitably ridiculous is what passes for civil actions these days -- or am I the only person who thinks a fat person suing McDonald's for making delicious fast food is "suitably ridiculous?" Also, just because a person or company won't win a lawsuit doesn't mean they can't bring the action against you, and unless you're a lawyer or happen to know one that will do this kind of thing pro bono, odds are it's going to cost you at least $2500 in legal fees alone. Like I said, Ego and Money.
Thorak 11-18-04, 02:12 AM	Thorak & Klyre>> Just a note, suitably ridiculous is what passes for civil actions these days -- or am I the only person who thinks a fat person suing McDonald's for making delicious fast food is "suitably ridiculous?" Also, just because a person or company won't win a lawsuit doesn't mean they can't bring the action against you, and unless you're a lawyer or happen to know one that will do this kind of thing pro bono, odds are it's going to cost you at least $2500 in legal fees alone. Like I said, Ego and Money. Just one reason I'm glad I live in Canada. Our judges have greater freedoms. One look at this kind of suit and they'd toss it out and make the plaintiff pay my legal costs for wasting my, and the judge's, time. Not to mention, we've got more extensive and better defined "fair use" laws.
Ranger REG 11-18-04, 02:35 AM	How about clause #4 in the linked Fair Use description? "4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work." Use for entertainment purposes among friends in an arena (pen and paper roleplaying) that the original work (a CRPG) doesn't cover clearly has absolutely no negative, and possible positive (by getting people interested enough to buy the game) effect on the potential market of the original work. It's fair use. If by "arena," we're talking about a tabletop session (aka facemeetings) or a private chat session, then that is allowable. But if you start to publicly display the derived material of someon else's trademarks and copyright on the internet, that is distribution. And distribution -- whether it is free or charge -- is a no-no under the IP use law. Of course, there is no such thing as Intellectual Property police. The trademark and copyright holders must do self-enforcing. But sometimes they do get help or anonymous tips. Hehehe. :devil: