Dundjinni and licensing dispute?

[msd]

Ridiculous?

And comparisions to MS Word . . . that's kinda dumb. A better comparision would be to an interesting and unique font you purchased and loaded into yor copy of MS Word . . . you either don't have the right to use that font commerically, or you paid a large fee which included the right to use that font commerically . . . not that there arent cool free fonts out there that dont have restrictions, but good hi-quality professionally designed fonts cost mucho dinero if you are also buying the rights to use them professionally.

I don't think it's dumb at all, and with all due respect, your analogy seems a little off. I think everyone would be cautious if they had bought a unique font and then commerically re-distributed a piece of work printed in that font.

That's not the case here...the maker of the software and the maker of the font/art packs are the same company. Is it reasonable to wonder, when you use Arial to compose a work in Word which you intend to be published, whether or not you should contact Microsoft and ask whether or not they are owed a royalty for each distributed copy?

And to suggest that the complaint that their maps are not commercially re-distributable is "ridiculous" is a little dramatic. I totally agree that reasonable people can differ on this issue, but I think the label ridiculous is a little extreme. They are introducing their product into a market in which every competitor allows commercial publication. In fact, they chose the exact same price point (approx. 80 USD) as the (arguably) leader of the RPG mapping industry. If that doesn't speak to the fact that Fluid itself sees themselves as being in competition with something like CC2, I'm not sure what does.

In the end, when all the other products in the marketplace allow this feature, the suggestion that Dundjinni should do so as well is hardly ridiculous...

 

[Ranger REG]

So, Fluid is in competition with Profantasy. Profantasy is in competition with NBOS (the reason why they dropped the CC2 Pro price down to about $40 US). So, who's NBOS in competition with?

 

[afstanton]

You know, if I have to create all the art packs for this just to create a map with it that I can sell, and it costs that much...I don't need it.

They seem to want to protect their IP for fear they will lose sales. That protection has made me decide not to buy it. It backfired in at least my case.

 

[Mynex]

You know, if I have to create all the art packs for this just to create a map with it that I can sell, and it costs that much...I don't need it.

They seem to want to protect their IP for fear they will lose sales. That protection has made me decide not to buy it. It backfired in at least my case.

And I'll post along the same lines as I posted on their forums..

"So what?"

The art work is their IP, they want to protect it, let them. Honestly, some of the art is great, some so-so and some I can do without.

They opened the program up to be of use to 'professional cartographers' (read: Those that want to make good looking maps fairly easily) but not their art packs? So What? The program itself makes life easier for people.

Want to make your own dungeon 'art'? Pretty simple... Take a digital camera, get a hold of some dwarven forge pieces... take pics, drop em in photoshop (or whatever) and create them at the png size you need. Done.

Ain't perfect... may not be pretty. But it'll be better than trying to hand draw it all, scan it is, resize... or create in photoshop (or whatever) for those of us pressed for time/artistic talent.

Good lord people.. use your heads... You want pictures to use? there's a TON of free art and 'real world' pictures that could be used... All it takes is hunting it down and converting it to the right size png... Even I can do that... And my artistic ability and PS ability makes a 3yr old with a box of broken crayons look like Van Goh work...

Who cares about their art? I'd rather have my own anyways...

Now, you all think about that for a second... If I, as an owner of CMP, who took over e-Tools and all that entailed, can say positive things about DJ/Fluid (And yes, I am here, in case you doubted it), then what are you complaining for? Gah...

 

[Archimagus]

Actually, as far as I can tell, Fluid has already upset the apple cart to everyone's advantage. They've introduced competition into the RPG mapping field.

I remember not too long ago that CC2 was priced at $79.95. Maybe my memory is off, but it seems the price cut came after Dundjinni was announced.

And just browsing the boards now, I see an aggreement between Code Monkey Publishing and Profantasy to create integrated adventure creation software.

Now, both of these things may have happened without Dundjinni, but they may also have not. I suspect that Dundjinni was a definite consideration in the decision-making process, in any case.

I would also suspect that Fluid is not unaware of these developments, and will adjust their business plan as needed.

Just to clear up a few mistakes here. While Fluid has created competition in the mapping field, some of your assumptions are incorrect.

The Price change has been discussed for at least 4 years. Well before Dundjinni existed or was announced.

Code Monkey and Profantasy teaming up has been discussed for two years, again, well before Dundjinni existed or was announced.

 

[wedgeski]

This is all just a case of Fluid not getting their legal underwear in order before releasing their product, and having to take the strictest line they can while they sort themselves out. I think they were a little short-sighted, but that's about it. If, in the future, they do anything other than allow royalty-free distribution of work based on their art-packs, they shut the door on every professional or semi-professional out there, and that's a big chunk o' change. But what do I know? They may be making millions off regular DM's and consider the risks to their IP to be in excess of any extra revenue the professional segment may generate. That's their call.

I've actually just started using DJ in earnest in the last few weeks and apart from the smelly UI, I really like it. With even a little experience, the results are undeniably excellent.

 

[Alan Shutko]

A better comparision would be to an interesting and unique font you purchased and loaded into yor copy of MS Word . . . you either don't have the right to use that font commerically, or you paid a large fee which included the right to use that font commerically . . .

Um, no. Ever read any of the type licenses? That's not the case for anything in Adobe's type library, nor Monotype, nor anyone else I've ever seen. I purchased a copy of both Spectrum and Optima, and I could use that commercially as much as I wanted, for the same low price anyone can get it from their online store.

Now, it gets somewhat less fuzzy if you're embedding the actual files into Word or PDF files which you distribute, but put it on paper and nobody cares how you use it.

(Sure, old comment, but so wrong it needed to be corrected.)

 

[Dinubabear]

According to this, you still have to give your works credit to Dundjinni.

*******************************
Providing appropriate credit

Two flavors. Logo and web link.

You must provide Dundjinni credit in the following instances:

• For maps used at a tournament or convention
• For maps submitted to a magazine or etc for
publication
• Any time you distribute more than 10 copies of
a map.
• Any time a digital map is posted to a website.
• Art objects do not require credit, unless it is
of the official flavor.
• Adventures offered for free already have the
Dundjinni credit on it when you print it, so
you are covered on this one.

**********************************

It says nothing about differentiating between whether or not you used the art package you bought or the art work you created.

Re-read it. Under User Maps (which is 100 % user Art) it says we can use Dundjinni like PhotoShop, but if it is a DJ map (which is any map that even includes 1 piece of DJ art) we have to go by thier rules which includes providing them credit. So if you want to design EVERYTHING (walls, floors, etc) you have different rights. I know if I had to design everything it would look pretty sad.

 

[Dinubabear]

In my mind, this is where the critical miss is...

I see the art packs as part of the functionality of the software just as in the same way that I consider the various fonts that come with Word to be part of the functionality of the software. While I appreciate that reasonable minds can disagree on this point and probably will, I still simply fail to see how this limitation offers them any "protection" of their IP.

I wish you were correct, but you are not. FONTS are not included with what you produce with them. Just try opening a multiple font form Like HeroForge on a Mac. Things won't line up. Whether they have the Mac version of Office or use Virtual PC. The only way that it will look the same is if they purchased some program that came with the same fonts. You also have to have the same fonts installed to view a web page correctly (or Microsoft has a program that will upload only the letters of a font that are used to a script if you want people to view the page in the correct font, but this prevents people from copying the font without purchase since they only get the case & letters used.)

I bet using Corel Draw they would have a problem with me publishing & selling the vector drawing of Heddy Lamore that was used on the cover of some of their boxes. Or any drawing program would have problems with you trying to sell the art that come with the program (samples) as your own.

The structure and ideas are fine to sell, like a word document. But try selling Wingdings2.TTF and see if you don't get sued by Microsoft. Same with Dundjinni, you can sell maps, just not with thier art.

 

[Steel_Wind]

And comparisions to MS Word . . . that's kinda dumb. A better comparision would be to an interesting and unique font you purchased and loaded into yor copy of MS Word . . . you either don't have the right to use that font commerically, or you paid a large fee which included the right to use that font commerically . . . not that there arent cool free fonts out there that dont have restrictions, but good hi-quality professionally designed fonts cost mucho dinero if you are also buying the rights to use them professionally.

That would be 100% dead wrong. Fonts are not protected by copyright.

The various font foundries protect the name of the typeface. The typeface itself is not protectable under copyright law and is specifcally excluded under the model international law. Indeed, for the very reason under discussion here: so that the copyright holder of the font would not attempt to exert ownership over creations composed using the font.

This is why we have fonts which are "cloned". The same font - renamed to escape the modicum of protection afforded it.

6,500 web pages advertising "free" fonts - which aren't - inundate the internet to prevent you from meaningfully locating the typeface of your choice via search engine. This is not an accident and is, in my opinion, a direct attempt by the typeface foundries to prevent google from destroying their business.