Publishers Opinion Of PCGen

[Morrus]

Re: my 2 cents

2. Not a flame, or incendiary but for everyone that has a problem with how fast there moving to ogl/d20. You wrote a book, say 100 pages, you checked the whole thing, you did this several times (in general, writing several more books) now imagine you have a dozen books you have to go through (I know they don’t have the whole book, but enough parts of much more than a dozen), checking the whole thing, plus almost as much code. Oh and you get to do this for no more than a hour a day, 5 days a week, how fast do you think you would get it done? then while working on it, fearing that your going to get in trouble for it, realize you have WebPages, and a front end that needs to be checked. it takes time, give it to them, they may have 45 lst monkeys, but probably 40 of them are those that said “I want so and so’s book such and such put into pcgen,, and got a put it in yourself or wait for a volunteer, so they coded one book, there not active in others, reducing their numbers. then take the coders and apply the same thing. I think this highlights the idea, and shows why its taking so long, add in to that last years worth of work that went toward user friendliness, including a total rework of every tab and they’ve been busy monkeys.

I can only speak for myself, but I certainly don't blame anyone for taking as long as they like to release a product. If someone takes 3 years to release a product, they've done nothing wrong. However, if Necromancer Games were to release a module which was not compliant, and posted somewhere saying "Yeah, we're working on getting it compliant" I'd be... singularly unimpressed.

AFAIC, the right thing to do is to cease distribution of PC Gen and start redistributing it as soon as it is compliant. Continuing to distribute it while simultaneously posting "we know it's not compliant yet" is no different to a publisher releasing a sourcebook and saying "We know this is not compliant, but we'll release another version of the book when we figure it out".

As I said, no one can blame you if it takes you a while to do. There are no mandated time limits between conception of and completion of a product. Take as long as you want; people understand that you're volunteers and aren't doing this full time. Your single, only obligation is to not release a non-compliant product (Whether that me a book, software or whatever). And you guys are not only not meeting that obligation, but you're doing so deliberately and consciously. You're choosing not to meet an obligation, which is worse, in my book, than merely failing to do so.

To sum up -- the fact that you guys are volunteers is being presented as justification for non-compliance. It's not. What it is is justification for you to take a longer time to reach compliance (which we'll all understand), but doesn't magically absolve you of your responsibilities.

 

[Grazzt]

Re: Re: my 2 cents

I can only speak for myself, but I certainly don't blame anyone for taking as long as they like to release a product. If someone takes 3 years to release a product, they've done nothing wrong. However, if Necromancer Games were to release a module which was not compliant, and posted somewhere saying "Yeah, we're working on getting it compliant" I'd be... singularly unimpressed.

Agree Morrus. Take as long as you must to release a product, but don't release it and then say "We'll be compliant shortly."

As for the NG example, during writing for the Tome of Horrors, I had several manuscripts sitting with me that had to be edited for content (as well as making sure they were 100% compliant with the licenses). I also had to make sure the Tome was 100% compliant.

Our writers know the licenses fairly well (guess we're lucky in that one), and even if they do slip and use something that is a no-no (which does happen from time to time), Clark or I catch it during the content or final edit.

Once you get the hang of the license and understand what you can and cannot do (especially regarding content usage), it isnt that hard at all to tear through a project without referring to the licenses at all. Sorta the "I know it like the back of my hand" thing. Once it is 100% compliant it moves on to the next stage.

AFAIC, the right thing to do is to cease distribution of PC Gen and start redistributing it as soon as it is compliant. Continuing to distribute it while simultaneously posting "we know it's not compliant yet" is no different to a publisher releasing a sourcebook and saying "We know this is not compliant, but we'll release another version of the book when we figure it out".

I have to agree here, though if WotC hasn't really told you to STOP distribution and they seem to be ok with you guys releasing a product that isn't 100% compliant yet, I don't fault you guys for not ceasing. Though again, I agree with Morrus, that it would be the "right" thing to do. Just seems more professional to cease until compliant, I guess. (Just my opinion though.)

To sum up -- the fact that you guys are volunteers is being presented as justification for non-compliance. It's not. What it is is justification for you to take a longer time to reach compliance (which we'll all understand), but doesn't magically absolve you of your responsibilities.

Yeppers- agreed. Voluntary or not, if you wanna play the game, ya gotta play by the rules.

 

[Cergorach]

*snicker*

@Morrus and Grazzt
Guys, no offense, but to hear this from you two... OMG!

I remember the Creature Catalog in it's old form, it converted all the creatures from AD&D 1st edition and AD&D 2nd edition that where not in the monster manual. NO LISENCE, NO NOTHING!

Only after WotC started making a fuss did things change. Now, either my memory is muddled (and that is a possibility) or you are calling people out on mistakes you, yourself also made in the past.

These folks are amateurs, probably more so than you two. Their main intention is to code something good, something that everyone can use, i think you two can find yourself in that. Why not give them the bennefit of the doubt and be a little more forgiving...

Now i don't know about you folks, but intentions are more important to me than rules. Those with bad intentions that follow the rules a worse than people that break the rules with good intentions. And you know what? I'm happy that Anthony sees it like that as well.

For the religious people:
God made an Alpha release in seven days. By casting Adam and Eve out of Paradise(tm) he went into Beta. Noah filled a bug report, and you know what, we're still in Beta. I see rather few people following God's Liscence. Probably due to the different version that are out there, the Koran (J & I edition), Bible, etc. People don't know what Lisence to follow, and rather choose not to follow it at all...

*grins* it's a joke people (at least the last part is).

 

[Arnix]

Ah, but they were playing by the rules. Just a different set. They follow the copyright laws, which they could and still can legally do. They decided to move toward OGL. As such until they are OGL or use OGL content in an OGL way, then they can still sue teh copyright laws. I *believe* that they are still under copyright laws until they exceed the limits set by copyrights laws (thus entering into OGL area) or until such time as they "publish" as OGL compliant.

Currently, they claim as "moving to OGL". That implies transition. A movement from simple copyright to strict OGL.

You may use copyright without OGL.

See the many above posts for reference to my post's topics.


Arnix (tm)

 

[Morrus]

*snicker*

@Morrus and Grazzt
Guys, no offense, but to hear this from you two! OMG!

I remember the Creature Catalog in it's old form, it converted all the creatures from AD&D 1st edition and AD&D 2nd edition that where not in the monster manual. NO LISENCE, NO NOTHING!

Only after WotC started making a fuss did things change. No either my memory is muddled (and that is a possibility) or you are calling people out on mistakes you, yourself made in the past.

That's not actually true. I'm sure Scott can speak for himself, but the CC was originally available under Dancey and Butler's fan site policy. Not the same thing at all, and not applicable to a product.

As soon as WotC's policy altered, Scott altered his site. He did that immediately. This also applies to the conversion library here at EN World - originally there under express permission; as the very second I received that email from AV that the original permission was withdrawn in favour of a new ESD conversion policy, the page came down. Literally within seconds. It went up again when a specific 6-month ESD conversion allowance was given to me, and the old material will be removed on September 1st, the day that that 6 month allowance expires.

That said, even if your statements had been true, I'd say that, having been through it, Scott in particular would be particularly qualified to comment on the subject.

WotC and EN World (and Eric's site long before it) have always worked closely on such things. Bear in mind that EN World is a news reporting site and is able to use trademarks and copyrighted material for that purpose. EN World is not a D20 or OGL product, and never could be.

Your memory is not serving you well in this case, I'm afraid. -- at any time I become aware of a problem, I solve it immediately or remove the offending material until it is solved. I don't leave it there saying "well, I'll make it legal at some point".

 

[Morrus]

Ah, but they were playing by the rules. Just a different set. They follow the copyright laws, which they could and still can legally do. They decided to move toward OGL. As such until they are OGL or use OGL content in an OGL way, then they can still sue teh copyright laws. I *believe* that they are still under copyright laws until they exceed the limits set by copyrights laws (thus entering into OGL area) or until such time as they "publish" as OGL compliant.

Currently, they claim as "moving to OGL". That implies transition. A movement from simple copyright to strict OGL.

You may use copyright without OGL.

Actually, no. The point is that, as pointed out by a few people above, they are actually using the OGL whether they like it or not, or whether they intended to or not. Stating "we're not using it" means nothing; not using is the only way not to use it.

You can't have a transition peirod between using it and not using it. It's a binary thing; either you are or you aren't. You can't use half of a license.

 

[Arnix]

True, you either use it or you don't.

They are not currently using it. Currently they are using copyright laws, same as this site and a ton of other sites. They are moving toward using OGL, until such time as they are OGL compliant or exceed copyright limits or claim OGL complaince (maybe a few other ways), then they can maintain under the copyright laws.

As far as the data used, they are still within those laws. As to saying that they are moving toward OGL, they are. They can say that. They can not claim to be OGL complaint, because they are not.

Does that mean they are acting illegally? Not really. Not as long as they still fall within the limits of copyright and do not claim OGL complaince or violate trademarks or etc.

Are tehy "wrong" in how they are doing what they are doing? Maybe. Depends on who you ask. They have been exceeding the spirit of the OGL.

Could they do that in the manner that it was done? Sure. See above.

Should they follow the spirit of the OG? Absolutely.

Are they? Not yet.

Are they trying to? Yes. A ton of work is being done to move into the realm of playing nice.


This thread has proabaly exceeded the limits of posts where most people will read so... I think those of us still psoting are just arguing amongst ourselves and accomplishing little.



Arnix (tm)

 

[Grazzt]

*snicker*

@Morrus and Grazzt
Guys, no offense, but to hear this from you two... OMG!

I remember the Creature Catalog in it's old form, it converted all the creatures from AD&D 1st edition and AD&D 2nd edition that where not in the monster manual. NO LISENCE, NO NOTHING!

Under the fan site policy I was allowed to do that. I only started using the OGL when WotC (AV to be exact) asked me to. They didnt tell me I had to and didnt tell me I wasnt compliant. AV simply said that the way they handled conversions was gonna be working differently very soon and said I needed to post the OGL on my site. Which I did. And according to WotC everything with the Creature Catalog is (as it always has been) cool.

So- I was never not in compliance. I didnt even have to use the license to begin with. It was done as a fan site and fell under the WotC fan site policy. I emailed WotC about this a long time ago and was told by the legal peeps there that the site was fine as it was. Just do what I was doing. When it came time to change, I did it. No questions asked. No problems. Took all of a few hours to change it over.

 

[Arnix]

Very similar to PCGen. Only they have to change code not html. Code usualy takes a bit longer.

 

[Morrus]

Very similar to PCGen. Only they have to change code not html. Code usualy takes a bit longer.

And so they should really stop distributing until it was done. Scott, as I recall, actually took his site down for those few hours. I removed the conversion library until it was OK to put it back up.

So, yeah - they may be in a similar position, but they're responding in a different way. Except, of course, that they weren't under the fan site policy, which didn't apply to a product.