I appologize . . .

[Ghostwind]

I think everyone is in agreement that first and foremost, the responsibility of making sure a product is compliant with the OGL/d20STL is both the author(s) and publisher. They are the ones responsible for crafting the product and they should do everything in their power to make sure it complies with the license.

As far as holding a vendor, responsible for policing his own products, let's be realistic folks. There is no way a vendor can be expected to police every product he sells. Consider the sheer number of skus a typical vendor supports. If he had to read every single one, he would never be able to keep up with the product flow. The best he can do is assume that the publisher is doing their job responsibly so he can focus on running his business which is his primary concern. The only time a vendor really need be concerned is when the first complaint comes in (to him directly and not through the grapevine). At that point, common sense says he would examine the product in question and if he found the complaint was valid, take steps to remove it from sale pending contact with the publisher or distributor.

Regarding this particular thread, James did exactly as he should have done in a very responsible way. As soon as he was contacted directly, he examined the book, found it to be in violations and yanked it. End story.

The real blame goes back to the original author and publisher. That's where folks' wrath should be directed rather than the service who was selling the book and acting as the middleman.

 

[tensen]

My first comments were to a person who was personally attacking our store and our abilities. It was a response to the person flaming us for not taking action yet. It had nothing to do with our intentions. It's always or policy to remove illigal or very low quality product. We've done it in the past, we'll continue to do it. What got me was that someone was flaming me cause I didn't do it quicker - yet no one bothered to even email us at RPGNow to tell us about the problem.

So there was only 1 action. We removed the product after confirmed. The first response was just a rebutle to someone who thought it appropriate to bash us in public for this crap being put online.

James

Oops. Actually then 3 points.
The first point was mine when I made a rough comment on quality control. Which is your policy as you say it. But your responce to me seemed to say it wasn't.. which I think then prompted the attack by another person for the action.

I hereby apologize...keeping in direct topic to this thread... for my accidental involvement in the derailment of the activity, and any incidental annoyances I may have caused.

 

[WastedTime]

I think everyone is in agreement that first and foremost, the responsibility of making sure a product is compliant with the OGL/d20STL is both the author(s) and publisher. . . As far as holding a vendor, responsible for policing his own products, let's be realistic folks. . .

I certainly do agree with you. However, I still feel the need to point out that ignorance is rarely a defense under law. What I mean is that distributing/selling a copyright/patent infringing product can make someone liable for direct infringement and for contributory infringement for the infringement of its customers. So to say that it is not a distributor's duty to police its products, while morally correct, may be on unstable legal legs. That said, rarely would a distributor/retailer be sued because they are, after all, the customer.

Personally, I think RPGHost acted perfectly. Once notice was given of possible infringing items, they removed said items after a reasonable period of investigation.

 

[rpghost]

I hereby apologize...keeping in direct topic to this thread... for my accidental involvement in the derailment of the activity, and any incidental annoyances I may have caused.

Well since its the title of this thread and the "in-thing" to do... I to will apologize cause after I re-read the first messages, I see that it was not as bad as I thought... Guess a busy day and late night typing isn't a good thing for public releations

James

 

[Unseelie]

I think everyone is in agreement that first and foremost, the responsibility of making sure a product is compliant with the OGL/d20STL is both the author(s) and publisher. They are the ones responsible for crafting the product and they should do everything in their power to make sure it complies with the license.

True, that is where the responsibility ultimately lies. However, the 'net by nature is to some extent self-policing... or rather, most of us don't want to be in the room when the 800 pound gorilla shows up.

Whether the publisher of the PDF in question realizes this or not, taking their file down before WOTC got involved was a favor.

 

[Dark Psion]

Re: Police

If it wasn't for the fact that products like this hard other PDF products none of us would really need to care. (I still would . . . I still want to know how many people wasted $5.)

Exactly how did I waste $5? I paid for and got my product and mine is the unedited director's cut.

Part of the problem here seems to be, what is legal where Psionics are concerned?

Wizard's site doesn't even have Psionics listed: http://www.wizards.com/D20/article.asp?x=srd

And the Open Gaming Foundation does have Psionics listed, but it is incomplete. Look at the powers, there are no descriptions. http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/srd.html

Are there supposed to be power descriptions? If not, what about powers that duplicate spells that are on the SRD, does that make them legal? Just looking at the SRD, it seem that someone just cut & pasted it together, so why hasn't psionics been updated yet?

Is publishing a members only club? Strutinan is a gamer trying to make a product that many of us have been waiting for and no one seems interested in making and all he gets for Christmas are complaints and warnings of legal action.

 

[philreed]

Re: Re: Police

Exactly how did I waste $5? I paid for and got my product and mine is the unedited director's cut.
.

Then, for you, it wasn't a waste of money. You bought something you wanted. For me it was. I spent $5 on an illegal product that basically reprints something I already have with a few tweaks here and there to make it "roxx" or something.

Publishing isn't a "club" or a right. It's hard work that includes a lot of things most customers don't even realize. Following the license is a big requirement of OGL/D20 publishing. This product did not follow that license even though the "author/publisher" was warned by many that he was doing things wrong.

 

[Steve Conan Trustrum]

Re: Re: Police

Exactly how did I waste $5? I paid for and got my product and mine is the unedited director's cut.

Part of the problem here seems to be, what is legal where Psionics are concerned?

Wizard's site doesn't even have Psionics listed: http://www.wizards.com/D20/article.asp?x=srd

And the Open Gaming Foundation does have Psionics listed, but it is incomplete. Look at the powers, there are no descriptions. http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/srd.html

Are there supposed to be power descriptions? If not, what about powers that duplicate spells that are on the SRD, does that make them legal? Just looking at the SRD, it seem that someone just cut & pasted it together, so why hasn't psionics been updated yet?

Is publishing a members only club? Strutinan is a gamer trying to make a product that many of us have been waiting for and no one seems interested in making and all he gets for Christmas are complaints and warnings of legal action.

Actually, he's gotten lots of advice - I should know, as I've said my fair share on the matter. However, don't try and play a "he's the victim here, why isn't anyone trying to help him?" card.

Quite frankly, the guy's problems are of his own creation. He didn't do any research on how to go about publishing under the d20 STL or the OGL, and that says a lot considering he is a member of ENWorld and thus could easily have asked any of the people who make it well known that they frequent here. He was naive, he was ignorant, and he made his own problems. Nobody here made them for him.

The fact that you're citing the WotC SRD and the OGF SRD and stating your confusion shows that you too are unaware of a good many things concerning d20 publication, namely the "gentlemans' agreement", the foundation upon which the intentions of most d20 publishing is based.

If complaints and legal action are his gifts for Christmas, then he's purchased them and wrapped them himself and your ignorant attempt to chastise the rest of us is just your way of putting the bow on it for him. Next Christmas I suggest he buy himself some research and preparation.

 

[The Sigil]

My quick and "uninformed" little opinion...

I do not blame RPGNow.com for not "screening" products. It seems to me that their policy is rather reasonable. They put up the products sent to them, trusting that the author(s) made an effort to be compliant/forthright about their product.

When a product is released that is not compliant or of dubious... shall we say... representation of itself, that is not on RPGNow. It is on the the author/publisher... remember Thetamagical Meorums?

When RPGNow.com becomes aware of a problem, they are usually pretty good about checking the problem and getting the offending product off the shelf within a day (at most) - as one would expect - they want to investigate the allegations before acting.

I really don't see what the issue here is any more. As far as I'm concerned, RPGNow.com has a track record of acting in good faith as far as removing uncompliant/misrepresented products as soon as they are aware of the violation and have researched the issue enough to confirm the violation. End of discussion, as far as I'm concerned. Nothing to get mad at them about - just at the guy who sent them the publication to begin with.

--The Sigil

 

[The Sigil]

To say that self-regulation isn't necessary or important is unfathomable to me. Hasn't Clark made this point time and time again, that it is important to protect all of your interests by helping protect and police the licenses that allow you to publish in the first place?

Yes. And there are enough individuals out there who will examine a product and inform RPGNow.com to be a "volunteer" police force of sorts.

And again, a shopkeeper is ultimately responsible for what he carries. If RPG Now becomes a haven for illegal products, what separates it from a file sharing program except profits? If I walk into a family bookstore and find adult materials strewn about, it is certainly the fault of the store owner. There is no difference here. If it takes a little longer to put products on the site, so be it. That's RPG Now's job. If it is their job to distribute illegal products, then I guess I should lay off.

I would suggest that (again) RPGNow has the responsibility to act when someone points out a problem with one of the products offered for sale... kind of like Toys Sure 'R' A Big Industry and a certain Harry Potter broom... ;-)

--The Sigil