Clearing the air about PCGen Data Files

[smetzger]

Well, people do deal directly with the netbook people, and don't always go down to each copyright holder. Not to mention, the netbook stuff explicitly has given permission for people to use it in other OGL products. I could be wrong, but I even seem to recall a statement that one needn't bother to contact them to use it in an OGL document.

Perhaps I'm wrong, but if I'm not, you kind of implicitly gave your permission for peopel to use it by submitting it to the netbook team.

I don't know if you are the guy, but SOMEONE from the netbook of feats requested that their stuff NEVER EVER be included in PCGen. We respected that. You can't ask more from us. As far as I know (and no, this is not my area, so I don't really know), the source is not available to the public right now, because the data team is ensuring that it's clean, and has permission from everone.

Devon Jones
GMGen Regent
PCGen BoD

A brief history recap on the NBoF...
PCGen asked to use NBoF material in PCGen.
NBoF board said yes.
PCGen interpreted that 'yes' as they don't need to follow OGL.
NBoF meant that yes as 'yes as long as you comply with OGL'.
I raised the stink about this.
NBoF issued some public statements saying you don't need permission just follow the OGL. Which is a correct statement for any OGL product.

I definantly raised the stink about this and insisted that if PCGen was to use my material they needed to follow the OGL.

 

[Twin Rose]

So many posts I want to respond to, I'll have to skip quoting.

Luke: You're right. Believe me, if I was "only out to make money" I'd go back to writing VB databases for Time Share Units. That was some pretty healthy money, I can tell you, and what funds me through life in general

Nine Hands: Don't sweat the beer, I was glad to "contribute" to the PCGen effort Besides, the bartender charged me less than half what she should have for a round of 20 drinks!

For a few people: In regards to using trademarks, I simply wouldn't. I wouldn't say, "Use this to import Sword & Fist into CSX." It would say, "Import/Export to/from Format A." Whether format A says, "PCGen Lst File" or "LST file" can be determined by friendly discourse. I certainly "won't make money" by using trademarks. The sales come one way or another. I doubt that anyone would pick up my DVD case, read on the back, "Works with LST files" and decide to make their purchase based on that fact. People just don't work that way. It's about saying to those people who HAVE made the purchase, "Look, we're working harder to make you happy ... and here's how." And making people smile and have good will. Unless I'm utterly mistaken, anyone making LST files is doing it -for that reason-. IN the end, I'm NOT going to integrate any one specific LST file... That'd be against the point.

 

[DMFTodd]

Let me make sure I understand soulcatcher:

1) Company X releases a book that is OGL
2) The OGL content is coded into a LST file for some volunter
3) The LST file is used in PCGen and GMGen

Since PCGen and GMGen are free and open, this is fine. If the LST file is used in a for-pay product, then that author is a "cheat", "rude" and "immoral".

 

[soulcatcher]

Let me make sure I understand soulcatcher:

1) Company X releases a book that is OGL
2) The OGL content is coded into a LST file for some volunter
3) The LST file is used in PCGen and GMGen

Since PCGen and GMGen are free and open, this is fine. If the LST file is used in a for-pay product, then that author is a "cheat", "rude" and "immoral".

well, if the author is using the lst file that is encoded by a volunteer to make money without contributing anything back, then well... yes.

The content is still free. and the author can type their own up.

Look at it this way. If I took a photocopy of a few pages from a book from company X, and then included those photocopied pages in my own book, and sold it - well, it would be clear that I am doing something that is wrong.

If I used that book as a reference, and typed some of the OGL data from the original book in mine, that would be fine.

Why is that?

Because the first example is a person taking more then is free. They are taking the formatting, the border art, and are doing no useful work on their own. They are giving nothing back.

Well, if a person takes a PCGen, volunteer created lst file, and just includes it in a product THEY are selling, it's the same thing.

People put work into the formatting, the comments, and so on. No one will have an issue with you taking the OGL data out of them, and making your own deravitive data files - its the issue of 'photocopying' it, and selling it.

I have a problem with people treating volunteers like dirt when they would treat another publisher well - purely because what the volunteer does is made available for free. The LST authors ARE publishers (look and Mongoose (I think) All their stuff is deravitive, but peopel still treat them with respect as a publisher), they do a lot of hard work, and deserve to recieve some respect instead of scorn.

At least that's my opinion.

Devon Jones
GMGen Regent
PCGen BoD

These are my opinions, not those of the PCGen BoD

 

[soulcatcher]

There are of course ways around this.

If there was an agreed upon standard, and all peopel who used it contributed time and energy to the data file creation, IMHO that is a different story altogether.....

Contributing something while one is taking from the jar is really a different beast.

Just another 2 cents on top of the pile of change.

Devon

 

[Veander]

I don't think anyone is saying they are going to INCLUDE lst files or any file not of their own in their respective programs. I do think some have said they would like to USE these files, such as witha converter or transformer. Thing is, I can't imagine PCGen to CSX working. I would like it to, but right now I am happy with just a statblock import in CS rather than worry about file formats. I mean the amout of detail that would be required to let CS sense what "affects" and conditions of affects... goodness I can't imagine it. I could probably say the same thing any way around with any other program (I think Luke said this before anyway).

If anyone is saying they think they have the right to put PCGen files in their program and specifically without even asking them to do it, I am fully against such a thing. Again I don't think anyone is saying that. It's possible miscommunication is happening if that's what you think soulcatcher.

V

 

[smetzger]

People put work into the formatting, the comments, and so on. No one will have an issue with you taking the OGL data out of them, and making your own deravitive data files - its the issue of 'photocopying' it, and selling it.

I have a problem with people treating volunteers like dirt when they would treat another publisher well - purely because what the volunteer does is made available for free. The LST authors ARE publishers (look and Mongoose (I think) All their stuff is deravitive, but peopel still treat them with respect as a publisher), they do a lot of hard work, and deserve to recieve some respect instead of scorn.

Well the OGL provides for giving proper credit to authors. Its section 15. I just downloaded the latest PCGen release and took a look at Section 15. You do not list the people who made the .lst files in your Section 15. Without them listed there is no way for anyone to give them proper credit.

Mongoose is a bad example for your argument. They have taken an essentially open source project and have photocopied it word for word and then sold it. The specific example I am speaking of is their Ultimate Feats book. It took word for word feats from the NetBook of Feats, a completly free product. But since the NetBook of Feats has all the authors listed in Section 15, they just updated Section 15 with all the authors names. Mongoose did not contact each of those authors and ask for permission. They just did it. Which is fine thats how the OGL works.

[Edit] I just took a look again at the PCGen section 15 and it doesn't even mention PCGen. [/Edit]

 

[Zub]

Who are they talking about here?

I saw this on the PCGEN board of directors minutes. I wonder who the mystery publisher is. Also why is Mynex back on the boards? I thought he got in a hissy fit and quit PCGen a while back.

CMP Merton (9:26:06 PM): issue 13 - <edited>Publisher.
soulcatcher521 (9:26:09 PM): I would rather see the minutes be published
CMP Mynex (9:26:12 PM): <expletive removed> him.
soulcatcher521 (9:26:18 PM): I second that
CMP Mynex (9:26:18 PM): Oh did I say that out loud? So sorry
CMP Merton (9:26:19 PM): Since the minutes for this may be published....
LetohNereg (9:26:20 PM): Not full minutes
GwaithMobile (9:26:22 PM): I'd rather not see that in reality
ShutUpPaul (9:26:28 PM): no, really Mynes, tell us what you think
karianna02 (9:26:37 PM): the fact that we report more often and we'll have an extra 5-10 2nds on the mailing list should make it open enough
ShutUpPaul (9:26:38 PM): Mynex even :-[
CMP Merton (9:26:49 PM): I think no matter what Paul replies to him, he will keep trying until he gets an answer
karianna02 (9:26:59 PM): the full minutes _will_ be published minus Mynex's swearing ;p
CMP Mynex (9:26:59 PM): Tell him no flat out and be done with him.
CMP Barak (9:27:03 PM): Isn;t Pauls letter an answer???
CMP Mynex (9:27:04 PM): (there that more polite?)
karianna02 (9:27:15 PM): Paul's letter should be fine
ShutUpPaul (9:27:24 PM): i'll get it out after the meeting
CMP Merton (9:27:29 PM): Paul's answer was fine, but he'll then start bugging me
karianna02 (9:27:39 PM): so ignore him ;p
GwaithMobile (9:27:42 PM): Why don't we do this on a case by case basis? Like we did for d20books?
CMP Mynex (9:27:42 PM): No by all means, include what I really think.. that should elicit some responses from my 'fans' when I was all 'fire and brimstone' as one of em pointed out.
CMP Merton (9:27:53 PM): and I have so many other things going on that I doubt I'll make it much of a priority to reply to him
ShutUpPaul (9:27:57 PM): not if i don't give him your email Bryan...and i'm not sure if i have that written down..i communicate to you via the groups
soulcatcher521 (9:27:59 PM): tell him he can use it if he hopen sources his whole package
CMP Merton (9:28:28 PM): yeah - if he adds the LGPL we'll talk
CMP Barak (9:28:30 PM): lmao
GwaithMobile (9:28:34 PM): Sounds good to me.
soulcatcher521 (9:28:40 PM): the day he gives his application away for free with source is the day we can work together
GwaithMobile (9:28:46 PM): And I'm sure the LST monkeys would be satisfied with thtat as well
karianna02 (9:28:53 PM): kewl
CMP Merton (9:29:00 PM): we skipped issue 1 because Tir wasn't here
CMP Mynex (9:29:02 PM): So tell him that.
CMP Mynex (9:29:12 PM): Tell him that if he LGPL's it, we'll actively work with him.
CMP Mynex (9:29:18 PM): Give HIM the option
GwaithMobile (9:29:40 PM): GPL or LGPL
soulcatcher521 (9:29:44 PM): I would accept GPL or the Berkeley license too ;-)
ShutUpPaul (9:29:49 PM): tell <edited Publisher> that PCGen will work with him if he becomes L/GPL?
CMP Mynex (9:29:51 PM): *shrug* either or...
CMP Mynex (9:29:54 PM): yep
soulcatcher521 (9:29:57 PM): yep
CMP Mynex (9:30:01 PM): He might, but I doubt it
ShutUpPaul (9:30:03 PM): what about others (Twin Rose...which is later)?
GwaithMobile (9:30:05 PM): Just say we'd be willing to discuss if he was...
CMP Mynex (9:30:06 PM): and if he does
CMP Mynex (9:30:09 PM): We'll get to TR

 

[soulcatcher]

I don't think anyone is saying they are going to INCLUDE lst files or any file not of their own in their respective programs. I do think some have said they would like to USE these files, such as witha converter or transformer. Thing is, I can't imagine PCGen to CSX working. I would like it to, but right now I am happy with just a statblock import in CS rather than worry about file formats. I mean the amout of detail that would be required to let CS sense what "affects" and conditions of affects... goodness I can't imagine it. I could probably say the same thing any way around with any other program (I think Luke said this before anyway).

If anyone is saying they think they have the right to put PCGen files in their program and specifically without even asking them to do it, I am fully against such a thing. Again I don't think anyone is saying that. It's possible miscommunication is happening if that's what you think soulcatcher.

V

ok, quick explaination:

1) I know that Twin Rose wants to interoperate with PCGen, and I think that is a wonderful thing. Interoperability is fine, and besides, it's the user's data, so who are we to say what they do with it.

2) I am under the impression that some packages ARE looking into taking the pcgen lst files, and including them in what they release.

so, to sum up, I have no gripe with Campaign Suite's intentions to make it so you can import stat blocks from PCGen. including pcgen data directly in a commercial release I do have a gripe with.

Devon Jones
GMGen Regent
PCGen BoD

same as before.....

 

[soulcatcher]

Well the OGL provides for giving proper credit to authors. Its section 15. I just downloaded the latest PCGen release and took a look at Section 15. You do not list the people who made the .lst files in your Section 15. Without them listed there is no way for anyone to give them proper credit.

That is a beta release. This has been corrected to the best of my knowledge in the upcoming 5.4 production release.

Mongoose is a bad example for your argument. They have taken an essentially open source project and have photocopied it word for word and then sold it. The specific example I am speaking of is their Ultimate Feats book. It took word for word feats from the NetBook of Feats, a completly free product. But since the NetBook of Feats has all the authors listed in Section 15, they just updated Section 15 with all the authors names. Mongoose did not contact each of those authors and ask for permission. They just did it. Which is fine thats how the OGL works.

At least they re-format it. They take the information, and give it a new presentation. That is far better then just taking someone else's files, and publishing those as your own work. Also, I find this an odd statement, weren't you the one who demanded that your feats never be in PCGen, even if we were fully OGL compliant? I seem to recall you saying that long ago.

[Edit] I just took a look again at the PCGen section 15 and it doesn't even mention PCGen. [/Edit]

5.4 production will.

Devon