Database of Feats

[Leopold]

Pfish, the license is cake. Copy what is declared OGC by the licensee into the product rip out anything that is not declared OGC such as a specific name of a person, place or thing, and make sure you copy his exact section 15 into your section 15 and that's that.

That's as loosely legal as I've ever interpreted the thing to be, as for 'permission' write to the publisher and ask them that you are going to use their work, most won't mind, if some do, just don't use theirs, there are a metric buttload of feats out there.

 

[Mark]

...and that's that.

Except it isn't. Once you add in the complications of isolating PI (which goes beyond the simple idea of stripping out proper names) and realize the number of companies with less than ideal PI declarations (plus some with difficult-to-navigate OGC declarations), it becomes more tricky.

The ideal database allows for multiple persons to upload information and all of them would need to be well-versed in these variations and interpretations. Further, someone would need to be overseeing all of the uploads and making sure that folks who would take your approach aren't playing fast and loose with other people's material. The person doing the overseeing would need to have the source material available to them to check anything being added by an outside party. The bottom line isn't really a matter of how much stuff is available, nor how much one could make off such a subscription database, it's the amount of risk and what could be lost if things go south.

Sorry to say, Leopold, because you seem like a nice enough guy, but even one person taking the slap-dash approach you describe could be very problematic. I'm sure Morrus will take a good hard look at the possible ramifications before risking his website and publishing interests on a database that would likely see limited use and have a limited potential upside.

 

[Michael Morris]

Mark, I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill. I will not be producing this database without the close support and coordination of the involved publishers **regardless** of whether I'm legally obliged to secure it.

To wit, I intend to move beyond what the law requires in order to keep relations between ENWorld and the publishing community secure and happy.

Legally we can add feats to the database in their OGL form the day they become available so long as we comply with the terms of the OGL (update the Section 15 disclaimer, etc.) However, do we really want to do that? I would think not - that's one of the reasons why a moratorium can be called.

Also, understand that the feats database will serve at least two purposes. One, it will house "official" or published feats. Feats with this status probably will be strictly controlled as to who can add them or edit them.

The second feature will be to allow folks to post their homebrew feats. Allowing that feature comes with the risk that folks may abuse it and add feats from WotC products that aren't OGL or products still subject to the moratorium (this is the approach I think will work best). However, there is nothing to stop folks from illegally posting feats **now** using the existing posting system. And our liability in these cases remains clear under the law as I outlined earlier - we have the right but not the obligation to remove offending material. Now, if we refused to remove it once it was brought to our attention one could very well have a case - but it has always been ENWorld policy to remove excessively large quotations from published works that have been posted without the permission of the owner.

 

[jmucchiello]

Mark, I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill. I will not be producing this database without the close support and coordination of the involved publishers **regardless** of whether I'm legally obliged to secure it.

In legal contexts, most molehills are mountains. Even with close support of the various publishers, this can only lead to grief.

And ultimately, it will not be as useful as people hope, because it won't have the WotC feats in it. Who needs a database with 6 feats with the same name and all different mechanics?

 

[Mark]

Mark, I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill.

I don't think so. There is no mountain or molehill here.

I will not be producing this database without the close support and coordination of the involved publishers **regardless** of whether I'm legally obliged to secure it.

That's not my point, though it bears mentioning that the support and coordination from involved publishers doesn't protect you if they happen to not be, completely, on firm legal ground. While you might be able to trust almost every publisher involved, if even one has messed something up and the database perpetuates the problem, their problem becomes your problem.

To wit, I intend to move beyond what the law requires in order to keep relations between ENWorld and the publishing community secure and happy.

Hence the suggestion of checking with a lawyer about the venture and to further have someone with the legal wherewithal (and the original source material for all additions to the database) to be sure that every addition is on firm legal ground. But this has nothing to do with keeping the publishing community happy, nor going beyond what is legally required. It has to do with keeping the person ultimately responsible for the database legally safe from risk.

Legally we can add feats to the database in their OGL form the day they become available so long as we comply with the terms of the OGL (update the Section 15 disclaimer, etc.) However, do we really want to do that? I would think not - that's one of the reasons why a moratorium can be called.

It's worth noting that it isn't a disclaimer, it's a Copyright Notice. The moratorium, however, has nothing to do with my point.

Also, understand that the feats database will serve at least two purposes. One, it will house "official" or published feats. Feats with this status probably will be strictly controlled as to who can add them or edit them.

I understand what you are proposing. None of it addresses my point and really isn't something I would address. The process of maintaining the database has problems of its own but that's putting the cart in front of the horse.

The second feature will be to allow folks to post their homebrew feats. Allowing that feature comes with the risk that folks may abuse it and add feats from WotC products that aren't OGL or products still subject to the moratorium (this is the approach I think will work best). However, there is nothing to stop folks from illegally posting feats **now** using the existing posting system. And our liability in these cases remains clear under the law as I outlined earlier - we have the right but not the obligation to remove offending material. Now, if we refused to remove it once it was brought to our attention one could very well have a case - but it has always been ENWorld policy to remove excessively large quotations from published works that have been posted without the permission of the owner.

Here's where you are missing the point. There's a difference between a random poster on a message board "fan site" (and the legal obligations that go with that) and a database set up as a distribution point for material using the license (and the legal obligations, and risk to future use of the license, that go with that).

Your insistance that there is no difference leads me to believe that you haven't looked into this far enough as of yet. Again, I would suggest that a lawyer needs to be consulted to see if, should something in such a database run afoul of the license and if such a thing were to move beyond the breach and cure provisions of the license, are EN World and/or EN Publishing at risk of losing the ability to use the license in future endeavors. Despite your opinion on the matter, or my opinion on the matter, it is certainly a large enough risk that a lawyer should be consulted. If it is possible that such a risk exists, it needs to be determined if the benefits to EN World and EN Publishing from such a project outweigh that potential risk.

It is neither a mountain nor a molehill. It is a concern you seem to be ignoring. I'm bowing out of this discussion at this point but I have to say that unless you check with a lawyer (perhaps more than one to be safe) and discover that EN World and EN Publishing at are no risk from such a project, then you really haven't even take the first step to making this a viable project. You're doing a lot of work, seemingly, on a database that you think is a cool idea (and it may well be) but the fact that you don't see my point and are bringing up issues that don't address my point leads me to believe that you're skipping a step and ignoring it in retrospect because you've invested some time in this cool idea that you'd rather not abandon.

I'm not asking a question, I'm suggesting that you need to be asking a question (and, indeed, should have asked it prior to even beginning this thread). It isn't me who needs an answer, it's whoever is going to be ultimately, legally responsible for the database that should have this information regarding risk.

Best of luck with the project and I hope that it all works out for everyone.

 

[Michael Morris]

Mark, while I'm the only one speaking here, be advised that I'm not acting in a vaccum here, and no decision regarding this will be made unilaterally. That you imply such, intentionally or not, is insulting.

Yes, I am pressing forward with this - at the very least I need it in order to make the maintanence of the Dusk site less of a headache. If all this database holds are the Dusk feats, so be it.

 

[Mark]

That you imply such, intentionally or not, is insulting.

I don't imply such. Knock it off. You're not just putting words in my mouth, you're saying that I had intentions I never had, even if I never had them. Read my words and take them at face value. Don't try to apply meaning to my words that isn't there and don't accuse me of insulting you, and then try to add a caveat that makes it impossible to defend. Believe me, if I ever have any intention of insulting you I will do more than imply it and it will be quite easy to recognize.

 

[Morrus]

Okey dokey, let's put this one to bed. It's not going anywhere healthy.