E-Tools: Anyone Sharing Custom Files?

[Mynex]

Mirriam-Webster Dictionary online.

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary

Data sets are produced by CMP.

Please note definition #3.

Main Entry: pi·ra·cy
Pronunciation: 'pI-r&-sE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -cies
Etymology: Medieval Latin piratia, from Late Greek peirateia, from Greek peiratEs pirate
Date: 1537
1 : an act of robbery on the high seas; also : an act resembling such robbery
2 : robbery on the high seas
3 : the unauthorized use of another's production, invention, or conception especially in infringement of a copyright

Also this;

http://www.hyperdictionary.com/dictionary/software+theft

Search Dictionary:

SOFTWARE THEFT
Computing Dictionary

Definition: The unauthorised duplication and/or use of computer software. This usually means unauthorised copying, either by individuals for use by themselves or their friends or, less commonly, by companies who then sell the illegal copies to users. Many kinds of software protection have been invented to try to reduce software theft but, with sufficient effort it is always possible to bypass or "crack" the protection, and software protection is often annoying for legitimate users.

Software theft was estimated for 1994 to have cost $15 billion in worldwide lost revenues to software publishers. It is a serious offence under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, which states that "The owner of the copyright has the exclusive right to copy the work.".

It is estimated that European software houses alone lose $6 billion per year through the unlawful copying and distribution of software, with much of this loss being through business users rather than "basement hackers". One Italian pirating operation employed over 100 staff and had a turnover of $10m.

It is illegal to: 1. Copy or distribute software or its documentation without the permission or licence of the copyright owner. 2. Run purchased software on two or more computers simultaneously unless the licence specifically allows it. 3. Knowingly or unknowingly allow, encourage or pressure employees to make or use illegal copies sources within the organisation. 4. Infringe laws against unauthorised software copying because a superior, colleague or friend compels or requests it. 5. Loan software in order that a copy be made of it.

When software is upgraded it is generally the case that the licence accompanying the new version revokes the old version. This means that it is illegal to run both the old and new versions as only the new version is licensed.

Both individuals and companies may be convicted of piracy offences. Officers of a company are also liable to conviction if the offences were carried out by the company with their consent. On conviction, the guilty party can face imprisonment for up to two years (five in USA), an unlimited fine or both as well as being sued for copyright infringement (with no limit) by the copyright owner.

Some people mistakenly think that, because it is so easy to make illegal copies of software, that it is less wrong than, say, stealing it from a shop. In fact, both actions deprive software producers of the income they need to continue their business and develop their products.

Software theft should be reported to the Federation Against Software Theft (FAST).

See also Business Software Alliance, software audit, software law.

 

[Mynex]

Let's call a truce here over whether piracy is theft or not, ok?

I can see the frustration, bigtime. I heard early on that there would be some kind of files for Arcana Unearthed (wasn't necessarily for eTools, but at least for PC Gen) but haven't seen anything yet. So I put eTools files together for my AU campaign and share those with my group only. Does it suck that I can't share those with the rest of the world? Sure. I think having them available would be a boon to both the eTools and AU communities. But I can't, so I don't.

The PCGen AU files are getting some finishing tweaks, then they go back to Sue and Monte for final review... Shouldn't be too much longer.

As for AU in eTools, can't say anything at the moment, but there may be good news on the near horizon, so hang in there.

 

[DMFTodd]

1) PCGen data files at the time (of WotC's materials) were under Fair Use from PCGen's perspective (as well as our lawyers).

Do you still feel that way?

If yes, then let's play a hypothetical: I create the datasets for the WOTC splatbooks myself. I put up a website and give them away for free. I could do this couldn't I using the same "fair use" argument that PCGen did previously?

2) At the time, no one was making data sets for sale under any license agreement.

I'm not following your argument here. If it's fair use, why does it matter if someone else is selling it? Leonard Maltin sells a book of movie reviews which falls under fair use. That doesn't keep Roger Ebert from reviewing those movies as well.

3) CMP came well after PCGen went OGL/D20

Sorry, my bad.

So Todd, instead of trying to rehash old issues,

It's an old issue? Sorry, what's the answer then to the original poster's question. He said:

"So I got online and started looking and I can't find any sites with *user* created files. i found a site which had the E-Tools Helper and associated programes but no Files to use them with. So is anyone using this programing and does anyone have any files to share. I will be sharing *what I make up*"

Sounds like he wants to create his own datafiles and share them. Or he would like to use datasets that other people have created. That sounds like the fair use argument PCGen made long ago. Isn't that OK?

and then have people spread those files across Kazaa/personal web space/etc and then come tell me that's not theft.

I absolutely agree with you here. The sharing of files that you have made is piracy. You can't do that.

The original poster didn't state that he wanted your files though. He specifically mentioned user created info.

The person who mentioned Kazaa didn't say anything about copyrighted files either. He just said to check Kazaa. Sharing my user created files on Kazaa would be fair use again wouldn't it?

 

[merton_monk]

Do you still feel that way?

If yes, then let's play a hypothetical: I create the datasets for the WOTC splatbooks myself. I put up a website and give them away for free. I could do this couldn't I using the same "fair use" argument that PCGen did previously?

Ummm.... does it matter how any of us feel? Wotc owns the IP - so you'd have to take that up with them. Feel free to do so, our discussions with them were laborious but always pleasant. PCGen seeks permission from the publishers before including anything in its free distribution, and I think that's a good policy. Distributing them on your own server or through Kazaa is irrelevant. I doubt Wotc cares if you create data files for your own usages (you own the book, so you can put the info into a different format for your own usage), it's the distribution of said material that Wotc would take issue with. That's a decision you're free to make, though it's not so free to follow through with it.

Bryan McRoberts
Code Monkey Publishing, Co-Founder
Benevolent Dictator of PCGen

 

[EricNoah]

And I do just need to add a bit about why the whole "checking out books from the library is the same as downloading files on the internet" analogy is flawed.

When you borrow a book from the library, you are taking a physical copy. While you have it, no one else can use it. When you return it, one other person can borrow it. There are no laws that say you can't lend out a physical item.

But when you download eTools files you are making a copy of the files. It's not like when you download them you are "borrowing" them and the original gets erased so now you have the only copy. Copying decreases the value of the item for those who want to make money by selling legitimate copies.

If file-"sharing" software really did work like a library we wouldn't have a problem -- there would be maybe one copy of "Livin' La Vida Loca" floating around on the internet, and if you really were "sharing" it it would be erased from your computer when someone downloaded it from you. Hmm, that's actually kind of a cool idea...

 

[Enkhidu]

Dangit, Eric! Here I was, fighting the urge to respond to that post because you wanted called for a truce, only to have you come on and give exactly the same clarification that I was going to.

Stinky old mod...

Anyway, Eric's right - file sharing is completely different than physical sharing, because the person doing the sharing doesn't give anything up when he "lends" it to another person.

Look at it this way - let's say you do contract work for The Widgets Company. The Widgets Company (TWC) pays you X amount of money for each widget you make. However, TWC has just made a perfect clone of you that does exactly the same type, quality, and amount of work you do - its a perfect copy of everything you are and do. And, because they now have someone else doing exactly the kind of work you do, they don't need you as much any more. Instead of paying you to make widgets, they simply use your clone to make them instead. So, every time your clone makes a widget, you effectively lose X amount of money!

This is a far more accurate model of how downloading files works ends up working. Its no where near like lending a friend your new PHB.

 

[Mynex]

Do you still feel that way?

If yes, then let's play a hypothetical: I create the datasets for the WOTC splatbooks myself. I put up a website and give them away for free. I could do this couldn't I using the same "fair use" argument that PCGen did previously?


I'm not following your argument here. If it's fair use, why does it matter if someone else is selling it? Leonard Maltin sells a book of movie reviews which falls under fair use. That doesn't keep Roger Ebert from reviewing those movies as well.


Sorry, my bad.


It's an old issue? Sorry, what's the answer then to the original poster's question. He said:

"So I got online and started looking and I can't find any sites with *user* created files. i found a site which had the E-Tools Helper and associated programes but no Files to use them with. So is anyone using this programing and does anyone have any files to share. I will be sharing *what I make up*"

Sounds like he wants to create his own datafiles and share them. Or he would like to use datasets that other people have created. That sounds like the fair use argument PCGen made long ago. Isn't that OK?


I absolutely agree with you here. The sharing of files that you have made is piracy. You can't do that.

The original poster didn't state that he wanted your files though. He specifically mentioned user created info.

The person who mentioned Kazaa didn't say anything about copyrighted files either. He just said to check Kazaa. Sharing my user created files on Kazaa would be fair use again wouldn't it?

Yes I still do feel that way, but as I noted, money and courts = time and money wasted. It was far easier to work with them than it was to fight with them, and it proved far more beneficial that way.

I wasn't replying to the original poster actually... I was replying to the person who said look on Kazaa... Personal created _custom_ files wouldn't be on Kazaa now would they? Let's be real here, you go onto Kazaa to find something, you're looking for an illegal copy of something... Kazaa and other peer to peer softwares had some really great potential, but it's been co-opted by those that would rather pirate than have legitimate uses for it (not entirely, just a general statement of my opinion based on observation)...

Let's be clear here a second... If you create your own material, and then share it, that's perfectly fine... you created it, you own it, that simple. If you create your own files from a WotC book and then share it, that's not fine. Yes, they're user created, but you don't own the material.

There's a lot of fine distinctions in this debate, some of which are undergoing court challenges, some of which probably never will... but we're talking about one thing here, and only one thing... Getting software you didn't pay for.

It's theft, it's illegal, it shouldn't be done, but someone will always want something for nothing. *shrug*

All we can do as individuals, is not do it ourselves and at least attempt to discourage others from doing it. But in the end it's a personal decision whether to steal or not. *shrug*

 

[DMFTodd]

Yes I still do feel that way, [believe in Fair Use?]

.... If you create your own files from a WotC book and then share it, that's not fine.

I'm even more confused now.

PCGen distributed WOTC material in data files. At the time, you argued that this was Fair Use under Copyright Law. You say you still agree with this. But then you say that if someone where to do exactly the same thing, it would not be "fine". Which is it?

*IF* we believe that datasets are a Fair Use under copyright law then shouldn't someone be able to create an E:Tools dataset of WOTC material and call it Fair Use?

I realize that's a big IF and that if I feel that way but WOTC disagrees, my belief doesn't do me much good. I'm just trying to understand the issues.

 

[Chacal]

I'm even more confused now.

PCGen distributed WOTC material in data files. At the time, you argued that this was Fair Use under Copyright Law. You say you still agree with this. But then you say that if someone where to do exactly the same thing, it would not be "fine". Which is it?

I believe it's both.

Someone might think it's fair use, and agree to not do it because WotC said it wasn't "fine". Pcgen follows the "fine" way.


Saying others that doing what pcgen was doing before isn't fine is consistent IMO.


Whatever one thinks is Fair Use is irrelevant to the "it's fine", since only WotC can decide what's fine (wether people like it or not).

At least, it's how I understand it

Chacal

 

[herald]

I'm even more confused now.

PCGen distributed WOTC material in data files. At the time, you argued that this was Fair Use under Copyright Law. You say you still agree with this. But then you say that if someone where to do exactly the same thing, it would not be "fine". Which is it?

*IF* we believe that datasets are a Fair Use under copyright law then shouldn't someone be able to create an E:Tools dataset of WOTC material and call it Fair Use?

I realize that's a big IF and that if I feel that way but WOTC disagrees, my belief doesn't do me much good. I'm just trying to understand the issues.

Actually it comes down to this. WOTC wants to protect it's IP in any form. In order to use that IP, CMP has entered into an agreement to do so. I can't say for certain what those details are, but you can be sure that that CMP has to abide by what WOTC thinks is a legitamate and agreed use of it's IP.

WOTC has on more than one occation sent cease and desist orders to people it has felt have violated it's IP rights via distribution. And they have done so against people on Kazaa and other internet sources as well.

In the end, if you want to create something and it has WOTC IP (other than OGC) in it, you should contact WOTC and ask them if you can distribute it. Can there be anything more simple than that? You may own the book, but the work in the book belongs to someone. Publishers pay the rights to be able to produce books. (Public Domain excluded) You don't have the right to exceed the publisher's right just because you can reproduce it in another format.

So for all of those people who download PDFs of material for free off the internet that otherwise would not be, you can't claim it to be borrowing because you didn't ask the true source of the material.