Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sir Elton" data-source="post: 1591798" data-attributes="member: 14486">There should be an icon for Creative - LEGAL. Okay, with all the Flack being generated about DRM and Customer's fair use, I decided to make a quick trip to the <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Copyright Office</a> website and brush up on Copyright. Everyone needs to know where everyone stands. I suggest that everyone visits the sight so that everyone can know why DRM is so ugly to publishers and customers.      Copyright Basics      Copyright is there to protect my authorship or somelse's authorship of a d20 product.  Be it a collection of spells like The Book of Eldritch Might or a Bestiary like The Monster Manual.  Section 106 of the 1976 Copyright Act allows someone like Monte Cook to:      * To reproduce the work in a .pdf;      * To prepare derivative works based upon the          work;      * To distribute copies of the .pdf to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental,          lease, or lending;      It's illegal for anyone to violate his rights.  However, the Copright Law says that these rights are not unlimited in scope.  I'll get to that in a minute.       Copyright begins when the work is created in fixed form. The authorship of the work immediately becomes the property of the author who created the work. So only the Author or those that derive their rights from the Author can claim the copyright. Seems simple enough.    Work for Hire is different. Under that, the parent company buys the copyright from the writer. So, the company that hired the writer is considered the author. Which is why Dungeons and Dragons, Revised Edition and the upcoming 4th Edition (2006, maybe) and SRDs are owned by Wizards of the Coast.      So, by all rights, an RPG company can protect it's work.  Whether it is in print form or in .pdf form.      So, lets talk about fair use.     The distinction between fair use of someone's work and piracy of copyright isn't defined in the case of .pdfs. The Companies are saying one thing, and the customers are saying another. However, this is what the U.S. Copyright Office says about <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html" target="_blank">fair use</a>.    "Copyright protects the particular way an author has expressed himself; it does not extend to any ideas, systems, or factual information conveyed in the work. The safest course is always to get permission from the copyright owner before using copyrighted material. The Copyright Office cannot give this permission.    When it is impracticable to obtain permission, use of copyrighted material should be avoided unless the doctrine of “fair use” would clearly apply to the situation. The Copyright Office can neither determine if a certain use may be considered “fair” nor advise on possible copyright violations. If there is any doubt, it is advisable to consult an attorney.*"      So, does DRM violate Fair Use? Only an Attorney would know for sure; Popular wisdom says that it does, but company wisdom says that it doesn't. Clark Peterson of Necromancer Games, however, should be able to give a legal opinion. After all, he is an Attorney.      So, in conclusion, .pdfs open up a can of worms. DRM has brought this to everyone's attention. But I think that Customers should arm themselves, and the best way to arm themselves is to study Copyright Law. However, if I were a lawyer and I were giving an opinion about DRM, I would say that it would be illegal because it violates fair use.      However, this is something for the Courts to decide. As a Writer, I am entitled to the protections of the Copyright Law. But my customers are also entitled to use any .pdf I write and sell as part of their rights as the purchaser. DRM limits this use in order to protect from piracy; but it doesn't limit piracy. In fact, it has the potential to create unlimited Piracy and wholesale violation of Copyright.        In that way, DRM is illegal because it creates an Illegal situation rather than solves one. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />  Of course, that is my Layman's Opinion.  I am not a lawyer, but I do study Copyright a bit.</blockquote>

Verification