Gleemax Terms of Use - Unacceptable

[Hussar]

So, where are we?

We have examples of fantasy writers being unable to publisher their own works because of fanfic.

We have WOTC with deep enough pockets for someone to try to sue them. Suing Enworld wouldn't be worth it. Suing WOTC and Hasbro would be.

We have a history of WOTC actually paying fan contributors.

But, despite all of this, we hate the Gleemax boards TOU because it protects WOTC from spurious lawsuits and it might allow them to steal stuff from the forums.

 

[S'mon]

My view is, I bear WoTC no ill will, the 3e OGL was the best thing ever to happen to the RPG hobby IMO, but I have no intention of using Gleemax.

 

[PapersAndPaychecks]

So, where are we?

We have examples of fantasy writers being unable to publisher their own works because of fanfic.

We have WOTC with deep enough pockets for someone to try to sue them. Suing Enworld wouldn't be worth it. Suing WOTC and Hasbro would be.

We have a history of WOTC actually paying fan contributors.

But, despite all of this, we hate the Gleemax boards TOU because it protects WOTC from spurious lawsuits and it might allow them to steal stuff from the forums.

Eh? No, I don't think anyone "hates" it.

I think what most people in this thread are saying is, "post on ENWorld instead".

Is that okay by you, Hussar?

 

[Will]

Have you been reading the same thread?

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

Everything you write there is grist for their mill. They can use it in perpetuity without consideration to you.

Say rather that everything you write in a public forum is effectively grist for the mill of anybody who reads it, not just the owners of the website where you plastered it for open consumption. Add to that the fact that it is THEIR forum and they can establish whatever rules they like for its use especially if their rules limit their liability and potentially enhance their grist mill. I am at a loss to understand why anyone would think it should be different, or expect it to be any different.

If you have ideas that you don't want other people to pick up, formally publish and profit from, then you shouldn't be posting them for others to do just that. Not just on Gleemax but ANYWHERE, whether their legalese for signing up to post AT ALL specifically says so or not. Is this actually a concept so alien that it requires page after page of discussion to make it clear?

 

[Delta]

Say rather that everything you write in a public forum is effectively grist for the mill of anybody who reads it, not just the owners of the website where you plastered it for open consumption.... I am at a loss to understand why anyone would think it should be different, or expect it to be any different.

That's precisely contradicted by copyright law. When you write something only you have the right to make copies of it. Anywhere, online or not, public or private (with, of course, some specific exceptions). That's why WOTC needs this license, because by default, their use would in fact be illegal.

Now, if you talk about "ideas" that might be a different story. But if you're talking about "everything you write" then that's clearly covered by copyright law, and is exactly the opposite of what you're portraying.

 

[Hussar]

Eh? No, I don't think anyone "hates" it.

I think what most people in this thread are saying is, "post on ENWorld instead".

Is that okay by you, Hussar?

Well, let's look back shall we?

I am not so misguided that I think every post is "Valuable" but I find it cheap for me to spend my time helping others enjoy their game and kiss away every chance of compensation while I'm doing it.

I'm telling my friends that if you value you imagination or problem solving abilities WOTC has rules in place to RIP YOU OFF if you use their forums.

They have all the user identities. If they can't be bothered with considerations for user intellectual property then shame on them.

That's ridiculous and more than a little pathetic. I'm in no danger of ever posting anything on Gleemax, ever; or bothering to read it either.

I don't wish them harm but I feel badly used when I post there now. More than anything else it makes me feel unwelcome and taken advantage of.

For me this isn't about money, I don't have a large enough ego to think that someone will ever pay a dime for anything I write or paint. But it's the principal of the idea that someone can claim the use of my ideas while viciously protecting their own. (I love working on Open Source projects, because everyone is contributing, and the end result is open for everyone)

Viciously protecting?

Melee Guy's art

Fine problem solved for me personally I just post elsewhere. But at a deeper level I find the TOU ethically disgusting just like about every EULA I've ever read.

Ethically disgusting?

I think there's more than enough hate going on. Granted, maybe I'm just a sensitive guy. But, when people feel strong enough to use this kind of language, I'm getting the sense that there's some personal outrage going on.

 

[PapersAndPaychecks]

I think it would be helpful if we avoided imputing motives on other people.

I did characterise Gleemax's terms of use as "ridiculous and more than a little pathetic" but that's a far cry from what I understand by hate-speech.

What I said is that I wouldn't post on Gleemax on those terms. What I implied is I would continue to post on ENWorld instead, and that's what I recommend.

"Ethically disgusting" (which I didn't say) is strong language, but I think for some posters in some circumstances it could be quite justified.

 

[Sigurd]

Rejection, even outrage does not equal hate. This is not about WOTC but the license for their site. As a matter of fact this thread begins with respecting the terms of their site enough to read them. Most people don't, and its not exactly front and center on their web page.


People presented with a license should consider it from their own perspective for their own ends. All those who see WOTC as some sort of victim protecting themselves from lawsuits, what about protecting yourselves. Nobody I have seen in this thread hates the license maker. Rather, the license itself is unacceptable - see title of thread.

I like the board. I have liked D&D in every version its been offered (Which I have played and bought). I am sharing this because I find it disturbing and it makes me feel unwelcome. Many people in this post have felt the same way. There has been very little whining and no hate.

I believe that WOTC does not plan to exercise this license in the most unpopular ways possible. There is nobody claiming the sky will fall. I think Wizards will please more creative people, and therefore have more success if they change the license to be less aggressive. If WOTC has the intentions of respecting people's collaborations and\or ignoring the work on their website they can say so in the license. That is a statement of substance and clear communications. It is far better than warm fuzzies from people who have no real say or knowledge.


-Sigurd

Until then,, The WOTC\Gleemax License is unacceptable (to me)

 

[HeavenShallBurn]

Ethically disgusting?....I think there's more than enough hate going on. Granted, maybe I'm just a sensitive guy. But, when people feel strong enough to use this kind of language, I'm getting the sense that there's some personal outrage going on.

I do not hate WoTC, nor have I used hate-speech.

speech that attacks a person or group on the basis of race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation.

Above is the definition of hate speech. I said that I find the TOU to be unethical, very unethical. Just to be clear I find all such TOU to be unethical along with every EULA I've ever seen. This is not about practice or whether WoTC uses the terms of the TOU. The terms themselves are unethical for anyone to dictate to another. The point is not that they might make money off someone's post, it is that the terms dictate that anything posted is fair game for use in any way they feel without further permission, contact, or accreditation of source. If Intellectual Property is supposed to be respected it must be respected for everyone, whether money is involved is a non-point. Whether or not they are ever used these terms make it clear they do not respect the IP of those posting because they sign over any control of the IP. If a company is not willing to sign over it's IP in such a manner it should not ask anyone else to do so either.