Group Licenses for PDFs?

[jmucchiello]

To publishers of pdfs, how many of you would be willing to work a deal like this?

I don't see how this would work. You are essentially saying we should create PDF licenses similar to paper software licenses. With the amount of "borrowed" software there is in the world, I find it hard to believe that license tracking is something gamers really want to deal with. What would you receive that says you are validly licensed for the PDF? What would stop you from duplicating it?

Also, for me anyway, you'd have to take this up with RPGNow first. Whatever you received for the license would have to be provided through RPGNow's download structure.

 

[Blacksad]

Considering that ENworld keeps track of its customer, and that you can buy multiple copy of pdf, I think that it would be easy to make a reduction on pdf already bought one time.

People who use this license aren't the kind who will copy the file illegaly, and you won't change the mind of those who already did it, plus, it can grant more customer, IME there is only one person per group who might buy pdf, and it will be the same person who buy the license for his friend (i.e. me ).

I'm waiting for such a license on TFT and construct mechanus.
What are you doing now, you already overworked publisher

 

[philreed]

Construct Mechanus License

I'm waiting for such a license on TFT and construct mechanus.
What are you doing now, you already overworked publisher

I don't know what to do now. Feel free to e-mail me and we'll work something out. I'm going to keep thinking about this.

 

[Nifft]

I'm not in favor of "tracking" software. I don't think that's the answer in any arena -- alienating and criminalizing your customers isn't a good long-term position to take.

On the other hand, publishers could double their income from "honorable" customers while not losing anything from those who either didn't wish to, or could not afford to, buy a license for thier group. This license would also cover printing out copies for everyone. Mechanics-wise, I'd pay extra, and get an email telling me "thanks".

I'd only be willing to pay double or triple for my 10-person group, so keep in mind that the "please everyone just buy a copy" isn't always going to be feasable.

-- Nifft

 

[MThibault]

Most group licenses are designed to address the needs of official corporations. At least in my experience as a librarian dealing with print journals and the like. The licenses very clearly define who and who is not a part of your organization for the purpose of sharing/copying the product in question.

This is problematic when you are dealing with unofficial organizations. How do you define a "regular gaming group"? Unless you are distributing through some sort of organized play system, you can`t really pin it down.

Secondly, official organizations have a vested interest in both avoiding litigation and continuing to receive the products. If it is important enough to pay for at all, it is adding value to the organization. If more than one person needs the product (you are looking for a group deal, after all) then there is even more value being added to your organization. If your subscription or purchase account is cut off, then the organization will no longer have access to the product it apparently needs. Therefore Harvard Publishing Group or the American Medical Association can offer a group license without worrying too much about corporations not playing by the rules.

With unofficial groups, there is a leap of faith that the individuals will play by the rules. Given that they are purchasing a group license in the first place, you are probably on fairly safe ground. The people who do this are the honest ones.

Generally these licenses are priced based on the number of users, with the discount increasing with the number of copies being distributed within the organization. I don`t think that there would be a need for a gaming-group license that covers more than 10 people so you don`t really need a big sliding scale. This also reduces the need to worry about customers lying about the size of their group to get into a more beneficial category. Either the bulk rate or individual rate is more beneficial and the individuals and group can decide.

If a maximum of two players in a group typically purchase any given product, then offering a group license for the price of three full-price purchases will probably increase sales without disproportionately shaving off the top end. Market research is really needed, but if 90% of your sales are copy number 1 or copy number 2 in the gaming group, then the 5% that are copy number 3 will still be purchased at the same price, and copies 4+ will be getting a deal. Where you would make your extra money would be by shifting purchases from the copy number 1 or 2 group to the group rate. Aside from the PHB and DMG, I have never seen more than 2 copies of any given publication at a table anyway. So I`m guessing that you would gain a lot more than you would lose through this sort of arrangement.

Cheers

 

[The Sigil]

FWIW, here's my take on the matter.

This is not legally binding on my part, but here's how I personally view it.

If you buy a PDF from S.T. Cooley Publishing (my company), you have a license to make as many copies as you need for your own personal use. Specifically, I expect you to have at least two copies on storage media (I won't get into "storing in RAM while it's displayed on screen") - one copy, say, on your home computer's hard disk, and another copy on a CD Archive of your stuff.

Furthermore, I have no problem with you placing a third copy on, say, your PC at work. Or a fourth copy on the laptop you take to games. Or whatever. You know when it's for YOUR personal use and when you're trying to "distribute it around." As long as it's for your own personal use, I don't care how many copies you make. It's none of my business, in fact. I would suggest the same holds true for printed copies. If you want to print one "nice" copy and bind it for your bookshelf and print one low-res, B&W "gaming copy" to mark up, I have no problem with it.

Things get a little trickier with your gaming group. I would say it's easiest to go by a "one printed copy" rule. By this I mean you can "lend" to a friend one printed copy. While he has this copy, you may not lend any further printed copies out. This makes it possible for your DM to review material between sessions (if you're a player) or if you're a DM, it allows your player to decide whether he wants that nifty prestige class. You have a copy for your personal use. Your DM (or player) has a copy to allow him/her to do what is necessary as well. Everyone's happy.

Of course, you'll also note that all of the text in my products is OGC (expect for a few very limited things like my company name, my own name, and product names). This is done deliberately - it means you can distribute it as much as you want, though you'll have to do a cut/paste.

FWIW, in the upcoming Enchiridion of Treasures and Objects d'Art, many of the pictures will be placed into the public domain to allow easy copying (some will not be).

My philosophy is that people, by and large, want to do the right thing. I expect that there will be a few that try to take advantage of things, but most people are more than willing to pay for quality content. I'm not going to put a burden on the vast majority to try and spite the few.

If you like my work, please pay for it. You know it's the right thing to do, and I hardly think the price is exorbitant. But I'm not going to piss off the vast majority of you trying to track down the few people who are passing illegal copies of my work. It's not worth it to me. I do this because I love it, not because I am trying to turn a profit. All of my PDF sales tend to get re-folded into the RPG community at large - I use almost all of the money so made to buy RPG material anyway. It's my "play fund."

I think I've made my point. I could easily say, "Mr. Consumer, you know what's morally right and wrong, legal ambiguity notwithstanding. I trust you to do the right thing. If you don't, it's on your own head." It accomplishes the same thing.

--The Sigil

 

[Fast Learner]

Borland (a software company) used to have a very simple license: effectively pretend that their software is a physical book. Because it's a physical book you can only access it in one place at one time. You can install your copy of the software on as many machines as you like, as long as you're only using it in one place at a time. If you want to use it two places at once, you need two copies, just like a book.

In a group licensing situation, you pay a certain price for n copies of the book.

So if you paid $5 for one copy of the PDF, perhaps you could pay $12 for, effectively, three copies. As long as no more than 3 copies are being accessed at the same time (in any form, electronic or printed), you're cool.

All of this has absolutely no effect on piracy, of course. It would simply be designed so that those of us who wanted to expose our whole group to something, allowing multiple people to use it at the same time, could feel like we were playing it straight without buying a bunch of individual copies. There are people out here who want to act morally in line with the publisher's needs, too, y'know.

 

[jmucchiello]

This is not legally binding on my part, but here's how I personally view it.

This is identical to my take on the matter. I just think we enter a sticky area if we try to make it legal. So, while unofficially I know you are going to share the PDF with your DM, why not buy him his own copy. (Yes, I know there's sometimes more than one DM.) There is no simple solution.

MThibault is absolutely correct that the problem here is there is no legal entity to sell the extra licenses to. If the original buyer buys the extra licenses than he may have n copies of the PDF around. Problem is most software licenses are non-transferable. IANAL but I don't know how hard it would be to make these licenses transferable and OGL compliant.

 

[Ghostwind]

This is just an off the top of my head thought so if it gets shot down quickly, so be it.

Instead of working up a licensing arrangement that is legal and binding, why not offer a multiple purchase discount? Buy one pdf at full price and additional copies (of the same title) would go for a reduced price of x%. Even though you would only be downloading the title once, it is effectively granting Y number of additional copies (or licenses to use the product). I would think that it would be easier to develop this system rather than coming up with a license everyone can agree on that is also legally binding.

For example, let's pick on Sigil's good book on mystical music with the really hard to pronounce title. It would stand to reason that I, as a DM, would likely pick it up on my own to possibly use in my campaign and pay full price. Now if I found it a valuable resource to my players, I would recommend it to them and encourage them to buy it. If a multiple purchase discount was in place, then the group of 4 could buy a single copy at full price followed by 3 more at the reduced price. Between the four of them they could average the cost and give the guy who just charged his credit card what they owed. Now that file could be transferred to them without breaking the one user agreement.

Your thoughts on this approach?

 

[jmucchiello]

Your thoughts on this approach?

I buy two copies of a work and give a copy to my DM. Later I stop seeing this DM and get a new group and DM. Can I revoke the old DMs copy and give my 2nd copy to the new DM?

This is the heart of licensing and transferable licensing. Remember I bought the license. The records say I bought two copies. But what you want is a way for me transfer the rights to someone else. That's where it becomes ugly.

How long does the publisher have to remember how many copies you have bought? Perhaps 6 months later I need another copy, should I get a discount then?