What will Masterplan be after the C&D?

[Kafen]

The difference is that iPlay4e, if you no longer have a DDI subscription, no longer provides you with the information from the compendium (assuming the power is not in the free stuff that everyone has access to.) Masterplan allowed you to download the compendium data and then continue to access it, even after your subscription had ended.

It is a difference. The length of data storage and scope of data storage is not an aspect of the GSL. Anyway, people are getting upset about it. I made my point. Data storage is data storage. *shrug*

Heh, I know the license people recall the GSL topics at WOTC. Yes? Software issues is the long time complaint. So, I hope nobody gets sore about it. If the hundreds of posts throwing thousands of words in countless walls of text can't get WOTC to change the policy. There is no need to get upset over it.

 

[guivre]

Regardless of the exact technical term, its clear that MP replicates a rather large portion of the DDI database. Getting hung up over obscure terms is beside the point.

Admin note: rudeness isn't cool - see my note later in the thread.

Your ignorance of the term doesn't make it obscure. It's a ubiquitous term that some people, having heard it, assumed they knew what it meant and started using it themselves despite having no idea what it means.

It's not besides the point at all, it was precisely *my* point, which is the only point I care about. Masterplan was repeatedly accused of data mining in this thread. They were not.

 

[Obryn]

However, the point about data storage is my point - both suites store the data. If you want to say that iPlay4e is hotlinking the data and using WOTC's bandwidth, I agree with you. The fact that both suites store some data is still present. The amount of data is beside the point once you start firing off C and D letters at people.

It's not the amount of data or a binary data/no-data issue; it's the kind of data, I think.

If iplay4e downloaded the Compendium and stored power information locally, I believe they would have gotten a C&D.

-O

 

[guivre]

It is a difference. The length of data storage and scope of data storage is not an aspect of the GSL. Anyway, people are getting upset about it. I made my point. Data storage is data storage. *shrug*

iPlay4e doesn't store anything beyond what is reasonable enough to qualify as web caching according to the TOS AFAIK.

It doesn't really matter though. WotC can selectively pursue what they feel is a violation of the TOS. More importantly I'm certain they could find pretext to shut down Masterplan (or force them to remove certain features) even if Masterplan was following the letter of the TOS (which they were not).

 

[malraux]

Your ignorance of the term doesn't make it obscure. It's a ubiquitous term that some people, having heard it, assumed they knew what it meant and started using it themselves despite having no idea what it means.

It's not besides the point at all, it was precisely *my* point, which is the only point I care about. Masterplan was repeatedly accused of data mining in this thread. They were not.

Take it up with WotC. Data mining is the term they use in the ToU.

 

[Kafen]

It's not the amount of data or a binary data/no-data issue; it's the kind of data, I think.

If iplay4e downloaded the Compendium and stored power information locally, I believe they would have gotten a C&D.

-O

Agreed, I think we are seeing the practical application of their 'fansite' policy in action more than a 'legit' C&D application. Basically, I think somebody at WOTC thinks Mastermind is competition and invoking the GSL limits. If they went by the strict GSL terms, the iPlay4e 'website' could not even store the character data much less export a native format of a product for which they do not have license. Although, I could see WOTC 'fansite policy' in this case coming back to bite them if they allow a third party website without a license to distribute files in their format - trademark wise. If they choose to selectively enforce the license while ignoring sites like iPlay4e, I would have no trouble citing this as an example of them not defending their trademark.

iPlay4e doesn't store anything beyond what is reasonable enough to qualify as web caching according to the TOS AFAIK.

It doesn't really matter though. WotC can selectively pursue what they feel is a violation of the TOS. More importantly I'm certain they could find pretext to shut down Masterplan (or force them to remove certain features) even if Masterplan was following the letter of the TOS (which they were not).

Agreed, however... If WOTC chooses not to enforce their trademark file format on the iPlay4e site, I wonder if they can stop software companies from adopting it. Masterplan might be able to expand on this aspect if WOTC loses their trademark to the file format.

 

[Fifth Element]

It's not besides the point at all, it was precisely *my* point, which is the only point I care about. Masterplan was repeatedly accused of data mining in this thread. They were not.

It should be clear from the context what was meant by the term.

 

[guivre]

Take it up with WotC. Data mining is the term they use in the ToU.

And Masterplan is not violating that portion of the agreement. It's not a difficult concept to follow. They are breaking other portions, but not that one.

WotC doesn't set definitions for the computing industry. The fact that they incorrectly use the term is just evidence of their lack of competence when it comes to the digital world. It doesn't change the meaning.

 

[guivre]

It should be clear from the context what was meant by the term.

It doesn't matter what WotC "meant" by the term. That portion of the agreement prohibits data mining, which has a specific meaning. They don't get to make up definitions and they certainly don't get to use verbiage in a legally binding document incorrectly and expect it to hold up.

Furthermore it's NOT clear as they go on to define what some of you think it means. What is clear is that someone that had little idea of what they were talking about threw a clause into the agreement that shouldn't have been in there.

 

[Asmor]

For the time being, things aren't actually going to be much different.

He'll release 9.0. Compendium stuff will be disabled, but...

...8.8 is still out in the aether, easy enough to obtain if you don't have it.

Further, there's no reason to think he'd get rid of the concept of libraries, and no reason to think he'd get change the way libraries are handled.

Put that together and what it means is you use 8.8 to download new libraries and then just copy them over to 9.0.

Now, the issue is that this is going to degrade as they change things... And in fact, it will degrade very quickly. Just last night I downloaded stuff and several items failed because it couldn't parse the HTML (I'm assuming they were items with monster stat blocks associated with them).

I strongly suspect that WotC's going to be changing their output of monsters to the new format soon, and at that point 8.8 will probably no longer be able to grab the monsters. For me, at least, that's when it will really be "dead."

Of course, there's already a huge wealth of content available for it anyways, so you could definitely play for many lifetimes with what's available.