Publishers Opinion Of PCGen

[2WS-Steve]

All the data files for e-tools are just tables in Access so I would think you could throw the Access tables out there, mark off the columns and rows that contain open content, and attach the OGL. The tables themselves are human readable.

I don't know if a special problem arises since the tables are formatted for use with a non-OGL product. However, it seems reasonable that a publisher could put information from his products in an Access database, add and update the OGL accordingly, then release that on the internet so that other people could determine what they want to do with it (i.e. load it into e-tools, use it for Campaign Suite or PCGen, use it with a homebrew program...).

 

[Cergorach]

The problem with your bottle of air theory is that when you bought the bottle of air, you also bought the ownership of the air. You don't actually BUY the ownership of the content of an OGL book, and therefore do NOT have the right to redistribute it (just like when you buy a novel, just because you own the novel does NOT mean you can sell the story - you don't own it).

Copyright laws have certain excemptions (did i spell this correctly), this is where the afore mentioned fairuse 'policy' comes in. Also the "Game mechanics cannot be copyrighted" rears it's little head (i've seen an actual document on this, if you want i can try and dig it up on the internet). My 'airhead' example was, as i said, ridiccluess. It has it faults, but you know what i mean (i hope). The point i was addressing is that if you use something (in this case my air) your automatically bound by a liscence sounds ridicclueless (and IMHO is). It's not that i try to say i'm right, i'm trying to point out scary e. I can think up a lot of very scarry Liscences and ways to apply them, call me paranoid...

 

[Cergorach]

All the data files for e-tools are just tables in Access so I would think you could throw the Access tables out there, mark off the columns and rows that contain open content, and attach the OGL. The tables themselves are human readable.

The problem is that not everyone that uses a computer has ACCESS, everyone that has a computer does have a way to read ASCII files.
There's a tool out that allows you to extract the data from the ACCESS database and turn it into XML formated text. I think that would be a lot more acceptable than using the ACCESS database Also couldn't you just add the liscence at the bottom of the file and say everything here is OGL except <insert lot of data here>? Or everything between these TAGS <insert lots of TAGS> is considered OGL?

 

[The Traveler]

I agree that those using Access would likely be on firmer ground if they converted their tables to a tab-delimited or other human-readable ASCII file. It'd be painfully easy to set up the database to read and update these files, so there's really no excuse. The core could still be Access, but if the criteria is human readability, ASCII is the way to go. It would also open the door to the development of versions of the program for other platforms.

 

[Orcus]

About the "bottle of air" example, here is the problem: you have to breathe, you dont have to use OGC. But I do understand your argument.

Regarding someone converting etools files, that isnt the point. The point is my control over my Product Identity content from my OGC. If I license stuff to etools I have a good rememdy: a company that has a clue, that I have worked with before, that I know understands the legal issues and that I know is responsible with my content. I dont feel that way about PCGen.

Can I stop a conversion? No. It will happen. That would be like not PDFing just because people might copy it. Who knows what I will do. Not sure yet.

Actually, I just emailed Eric Noah about how he is doing those things. I notice fans are converting content. I am going to talk to Steve Wieck at SSS this week to decide how to handle licensing this stuff, if at all.

Clark

 

[Mark]

Can I stop a conversion? No. It will happen. That would be like not PDFing just because people might copy it. Who knows what I will do. Not sure yet.

Reminds me of our conversation at GenCon about "Recognizable Consequences"...

 

[smetzger]

1) There is no human readability requirement in the OGL. The FAQ mentions human readability, but that is not legally binding. The requirement is to clearly mark the OGC portions as OGC. So, as long as that is done your Ok.

2) I have outlined a legal way in the Software forum to share OGC material E-Tools files.
http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=21628

3) It is possibly to use OGC without using the OGL. You need to get the copyright hoders permission and the permission of the copyright holder of and material that this material is derived from (usually WOTC, from the PHB core books). This has been confirmed by both a lawyer and Anthony Valtera on the OGL discussion list.

4) There is no rule for software that says you must separate the data from the code. One could release the source code and then mark sections of the source code as OGC. One reason most OGL/d20 software strives to separate code and data is that the OGL stipulates you cannot place any other licensing restrictions on an OGL product. Therefore, no GNU software license or even a standard EULA for the software.

5) It is unclear how PCGen thinks its legal. This is because:
a) there is an open letter to all d20 publishers on the main page. This suggests they are a d20 product.
b) No d20 logo on the program and no OGL included.
c) Combining points a) and b) I had come to the conclusion that PCGen was trying to get special permission from all publishers (should be copyright holders) to include their material without the OGL. There have also been several posts where people have said that PCGen is legal because they have the permission of all the publishers that they use. However, I have been told this is incorrect.
d) From some comments on this thread it seams that PCGen was trying to use fair use copyright rules and that game mechanics are not copyrightable.

So, its really not clear from readily available documentation included with PCGen, nor from the PCGen website how it is a legal piece of software. The facad of legality is suggested by the open letter to all publishers. If you are going to say you are legal it is my opinion that you should explain how you are legal.

Many pieces of fan created software do not contain the OGL and do not profess to be legal. It can therefore be easily concluded that they are not legal.

 

[Pyske]

A couple quick questions about licensing:

+ How formal does a license need to be? (Obviously, I realize that the more formal, the more likely to be defensible.)

For example, if MyGameCo gives permission to PCGen to include their content, is this sufficient to provide a legal license for MyGameCo's intellectual property?

+ Assuming this is the case, does MyGameCo bear any liability if PCGen is not found to be in compliance with the OGL or STL?

(Note 2: I recognize that liability != responsibility, and there are reasons to choose not to extend permission: i.e., in order to encourage widespread adoption & use of the OGL license.)

+ Assuming for the moment that PCGen had a similar sort of informal license with WotC (which has since been amended to bring it into line with the OGL/STL), are there any other legal complications which arise from such a license?

. . . . . . . -- Eric

 

[333 Dave]

Problems I see with PCGen:
It can't be a d20 product simply from the clause excluding any character generation.
It's in violation of the trademarks on Star Wars, Wheel of Time, and Call of Cthulhu just to name a few. Even if WotC could give permission to use these, which I'm fairly sure they can't, the PCGen folks said themselves they only established dialog with WotC at GenCon.
I'm sure there are several other problems with it. Yuck.

 

[Brown Jenkin]

As I am not a representitive in any way of PCGen this is a compleately unofficial anouncement. As of last night PCGen released version 3.1.0 which they claim should now be 100% d20/OGL compliant. They have made all changes asked for by WotC and have submitted it to them for thier approval. I'm sure that we will hear more officially from Mynex or Leopold about this at the appropriate time.