policy change?

[Shadeydm]

I see that a thread asking for a scan of the map from N1 was locked down as a policy violation. When did this change? I can recall quite clearly several threads where people posted scans of module maps to help out other members here.


One in particular was a review of the Barrow of the Forgotten King the OP has scans blown up to 1"=5' scale for minis and a glowing review from him and his players. This was a great thread which actually insipred me to buy the entire series of adventures and the scans really added a lot to the experience. At the time it was a well read thread that even mods had posted in and took no issue with the map scans.

So what changed and when?

 

[jdrakeh]

I see that a thread asking for a scan of the map from N1 was locked down as a policy violation. When did this change? I can recall quite clearly several threads where people posted scans of module maps to help out other members here.

I've never seen scans of commercial products posted here. I'm not saying it didn't happen, just that I've never seen it in six years of posting here.

One in particular was a review of the Barrow of the Forgotten King the OP has scans blown up to 1"=5' scale for minis and a glowing review from him and his players.

That review doesn't seem to be present in the database any longer, but are you certain that the "scans" weren't enlarged copies of the free map excerpts made available via the WotC site? I ask, because I have seen people distribute or link to enlarged copies of those maps here from time to time.

 

[Shadeydm]

I am quite positive and it was all the maps not just one or two from a preview.

 

[Piratecat]

Really? As far as I remember we've never allowed that. I have no problem if someone sees that thread and wants to email him to discuss it, but as far back as I can recall we've asked people not to request scans of copyrighted information.

If you can remember the product, I'd be interested to look up the thread. Either it flew under our radar or my memory is playing me false.

 

[stonegod]

The PBP fora use some maps, but they are almost always from free online sources (such as the low-res WotC scans and such or small excerpts of PDF stuff in something like the Pathfinder APs); all which I believe is acceptable under fair use. No complete high-res maps of an entire product, though.

 

[Piratecat]

Right, and that's fine, Stonegod.

To be clear, we don't get particularly fussed about old products. We don't condone pirating them, and we ask that people not request scans, but we're not going to overreact and suspend a member if someone posts to ask for a missing page.

And you know what? Low-rez scans of just the maps probably constitute fair use as well. I'll go mention that in the thread.

 

[Shadeydm]

Well anyways it was great and detailed review which included the maps of the adventure blown up to miniature scale and posts from the players commenting that the adventure wasn't really adversly affected by the linear nature of the adventure.

It was the main reason I bought that adventure as well as the follow up Sinister Spire and the third installment Fortress of the Yuan-ti.

I guess perhaps at the time such things were not strictly enforced if as you say the policy has not changed, too bad. Such things enriched the communuty and certainly helped sell product.

 

[Shadeydm]

I should note that it wasn't in the review section it was under general but it was cetainly review like in nature and having the maps in scale was great!

 

[S'mon]

In the N1 case, my understanding would be that if both requestor and sender had legitimately bought the product, then scanning & sending to the requestor for no charge would usually fall under non-commercial fair use in US law. Per the MP3.com case you can't do this commercially (say on an advertising-paid-for model, or for a fee), though.

 

[S'mon]

And you know what? Low-rez scans of just the maps probably constitute fair use as well. I'll go mention that in the thread.

Unauthorised reproduction of thumbnail images for linking purposes was held to be commercial fair use in a case whose name I should be able to recall since I used to teach it...

Edit: Kelly v Arriba - thanks, google!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly_v._Arriba_Soft_Corporation

I agree that reproducing maps from a game product, for the purpose of playing it, would seem highly likely to be fair use. The usual test is whether it interferes with commercial exploitation of the work.