D&D 4E What are the options for living without DDI?

[AbdulAlhazred]

Technically, they may be either violations of copyright, or of license agreements, depending on the details.

EN World does not support copyright infringement. Please don't use EN World to copy and distribute IP that doesn't belong to you.

I doubt anyone here is a lawyer (I certainly am not), but its pretty doubtful anything suggested in this thread is illegal or violates anything. WotC hit CBLoader with a C&D as I understand it, but all that means is they didn't LIKE it, not that it is actually violating anything. Certainly if you had DDI back when the old CB was distributed you're still allowed to use it, etc. WotC specifically DOES allow you to use software to access the Compendium. As to whether or not storing a copy of that info on your hard drive is OK or not is at the very least a deeply controversial point of law, certainly not clearly bad (giving the data to someone would be). Likewise Masterplan got a C&D, and then the Compendium DLing stuff got split out, but nobody has ever really established that you can't legally use it if you're a DDI subscriber.

There's no doubt that this is all a grey area, but frankly I'm going to use data that I pay to access in whatever way I want for my personal use, certainly until someone can clearly demonstrate that doing so is illegal or violates some civil code. At that point I'll just stop paying my taxes and revolt anyway...

 

[Desdichado]

I doubt anyone here is a lawyer (I certainly am not), but its pretty doubtful anything suggested in this thread is illegal or violates anything.

Actually, IIRC, Mistwell, who started this whole aside about the legality of the question in the first place, actually is one. Again, IIRC.

As an aside, [MENTION=2525]Mistwell[/MENTION], there's an ongoing controversy in my family about the pronunciation of the word. My wife, who mostly grew up in the Midwest says "loiyer." I say that when I meet someone who practices "loy" that's what I'll call him; meanwhile I pronounce it like law-yer.

We've asked some, just for fun, in the extended family who actually are lawyers how they pronounce it. Their answer? Attorney.

 

[Mistwell]

I doubt anyone here is a lawyer (I certainly am not), but its pretty doubtful anything suggested in this thread is illegal or violates anything. WotC hit CBLoader with a C&D as I understand it, but all that means is they didn't LIKE it, not that it is actually violating anything. Certainly if you had DDI back when the old CB was distributed you're still allowed to use it, etc. WotC specifically DOES allow you to use software to access the Compendium. As to whether or not storing a copy of that info on your hard drive is OK or not is at the very least a deeply controversial point of law, certainly not clearly bad (giving the data to someone would be). Likewise Masterplan got a C&D, and then the Compendium DLing stuff got split out, but nobody has ever really established that you can't legally use it if you're a DDI subscriber.

There's no doubt that this is all a grey area, but frankly I'm going to use data that I pay to access in whatever way I want for my personal use, certainly until someone can clearly demonstrate that doing so is illegal or violates some civil code. At that point I'll just stop paying my taxes and revolt anyway...

I am a lawyer, and yes much of it is copyright violations, and breach of the electronic license.

The OGL specifically excludes electronic tools and games. Nobody can use any WOTC copyrighted materials with those things, without their permission.

You can likely use your old character builder with the old set of data that doesn't include most of the books and any of the errata. But that's not what people were suggesting. They were suggesting using it with new sets of data - which is copyright violation. Nobody is allowed to distribute that data or receive a distribution of that data other than through WOTC, and only as a subscriber, and only under the terms and use they permit (which is currently with their current online method of accessing it).

All of this was in the license agreement you had to agree to, in order to subscribe in the first place.

I don't think there is anything "deeply controversial" about any of this. It's all pretty cut and dried copyright and license stuff. Legally, you can't do it without breaching copyright and/or the license itself. There's no gray area to it. You're either breaching a license you agreed to, or you're using copyrighted material without a license to do so. None of it is in the public domain, none of it is OK under a prior OGL, none of it is OK "because you paid for access at one time".

Now...will WOTC come after you? I personally doubt it. But, that opinion is given freely, and you get what you pay for.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I am a lawyer, and yes much of it is copyright violations, and breach of the electronic license.

Sorry, but having made my living in areas that often intersect with various parts of IP law, and having been a long-time friend of a man with a vast amount of experience in this area (who does happen to be an attorney) I find your legal reasoning simplistic and inaccurate. You may well be correct in advising people to stay clear of this kind of issue, as many of the things discussed here fall into very murky legal water, but nothing discussed here is clearly and inarguably either a breach of the DDI EULA, the GSL (4e is not licensed by WotC under the OGL), etc.

The OGL specifically excludes electronic tools and games. Nobody can use any WOTC copyrighted materials with those things, without their permission.

As pointed out above the OGL doesn't govern 4e, the GSL is a license under which you MAY use some WotC 4e content, but if you haven't signed a GSL license agreement it is irrelevant to you. I doubt most users have. Note that DDI is not governed by the GSL either, though if you have signed one it might have some impact on what you can or cannot do.

You can likely use your old character builder with the old set of data that doesn't include most of the books and any of the errata. But that's not what people were suggesting. They were suggesting using it with new sets of data - which is copyright violation.

Please explain EXACTLY why you would say this? Nobody has ever clarified the issue of format shifting. I have access to data in the DDI Compendium, if I reformat that data for my own personal use, even if I store extra copies of this data, there's no general legal principle under which this is a copyright violation. You should know this. In fact this must be true, as I clearly have the right to extract data from CB in order to form a character sheet and use it.

Nobody is allowed to distribute that data or receive a distribution of that data other than through WOTC, and only as a subscriber, and only under the terms and use they permit (which is currently with their current online method of accessing it).

Again, this is not clearly entirely true for several reasons. Just the idea that people 'cannot distribute data' is a highly dubious statement under any legal theory. Facts cannot be copyrighted.

All of this was in the license agreement you had to agree to, in order to subscribe in the first place.

Have you read that agreement? You might want to...

I don't think there is anything "deeply controversial" about any of this. It's all pretty cut and dried copyright and license stuff. Legally, you can't do it without breaching copyright and/or the license itself. There's no gray area to it. You're either breaching a license you agreed to, or you're using copyrighted material without a license to do so. None of it is in the public domain, none of it is OK under a prior OGL, none of it is OK "because you paid for access at one time".

Now...will WOTC come after you? I personally doubt it. But, that opinion is given freely, and you get what you pay for.

You're welcome to your opinion of course, but you would be wrong about the clarity of the law or lack of controversy. In an day and age when things like Aereo provoke appeals to the Supreme Court over subtle nuances of legal interpretation it is just patently ridiculous to believe that anything is clear about these situations. Its not even close to clear whether or not you can make a copy of a song off a CD you own, reformat it into MP3, put it on a thumb drive, and play it in your car on the way to work. Its not even remotely close to clear what the legal status of CBLoader would be. I'd lay better than even odds on WotC losing that fight if it were every hypothetically brought to court. It would certainly be a VERY complex case with a number of different aspects.

 

[Cadence]

... but its pretty doubtful anything suggested in this thread is illegal or violates anything...

I'm still not clear how C4's copying and modifying of 4e rules (apparently using the trade dress originally), touting them as a 4e compilation/upgrade, and distributing them, doesn't violate anything... taken together its seems a step or two over where I always thought the line was. :::shrugs:::

Of course with the number of full .pdf copies of just about everything ever made that come up at the top of google searches (one click viewing, no login) I guess the entire game industry has bigger problems than that IP wise.

{snip of editorializing on the practice}

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I'm still not clear how C4's copying and modifying of 4e rules (apparently using the trade dress originally), touting them as a 4e compilation/upgrade, and distributing them, doesn't violate anything... taken together its seems a step or two over where I always thought the line was. :::shrugs:::

Of course with the number of full .pdf copies of just about everything ever made that come up at the top of google searches (one click viewing, no login) I guess the entire game industry has bigger problems than that IP wise.

{snip of editorializing on the practice}

Fair enough, C4 is a whole other kettle of fish, which I agree is almost surely in violation of copyright, though there are still some arguments there he could make. I just doubt they would be very effective since he's pretty much copying the product effectively, even with some minor tweaks. There could be some other issues like Design Patents that could exist on some elements of the game's layout (stat blocks for instance might be something you could design patent, though we don't know if WotC did so even if they could have).

Things like Masterplan and CBLoader allowing DDI subscribers to put the data they have access to to use in new ways and new formats however is in no way shape or form 'clearly a violation' as Mistwell would have it. Its just not. These kinds of issues are murky enough with music, but they are even a whole lot more murky with games, who's rules are considered facts not subject to copyright in and of themselves (IE you can describe the rules of the Monopoly game, how the board is laid out, etc, just not, perhaps, in the exact words used by Hasbro). The same is presumably true of RPGs, but given their more creative and extensive nature even that isn't sure to hold up. It is just VERY VERY murky.

Honestly the "be a good citizen rule" is the best guide. If you do something that allows you to better enjoy and play a game without depriving its publishers of the fruits of their labor, you are probably OK. At worst you might be asked to stop, but in general the game companies want to be seen as good citizens too, and they want you to enjoy their product, as long as it doesn't cause them harm. Normally everyone gets along. In that context I don't think advising a player to use a tool like Masterplan and its DDI downloading tool so he can make encounters more easily or print out better stat blocks is particularly dubious. Again, as long as said person isn't going to hand all this data to his friend who doesn't have a DDI subscription or etc.

 

[Ryan Huffaker]

Who's to say that D&D4E is the only one to take their gaming into a digital medium? I know of one game in particular that aims to leave physical paper behind entirely. Go to the Google Play store and type in "Freedomsworn" to see what I mean.

 

[Blackbrrd]

Life has been much easier since I stopped running games that drove me crazy without software support. The DM of our 4E game still has DDI right now but if we are still playing when the plug gets pulled then we will level up with books and move on.

Those who didn't buy many books can learn a lesson from this. It is why Machete don't rent tabletop games.

I really do think you have got a good point here. 4e is so verbose, that to create certain character concepts, you have to sift through thousands of pages to get the feats, items and powers that makes that character concept work.

The last session I ran 4e as a DM, I used some cardboard triangles with pieces of paper for showing the monsters/pc initiative order, used a piece of paper to track the hp of the monsters, and a laptop to look up some monster stats (copied with print screen into paint from an adventure pdf). I could just as well have used the printed version of the module to avoid any computer use, but hey, I didn't have it.

In other words, as a DM, I don't need any software support to run 4e, but as a player, you might very well want the character builder. I know I would hate to be without it as a player.

Btw, the reason for the cardboard initiative tracking is to show the initiative to both me and the players at the same time. It makes the player more aware of what's happening next, and plan what they want to do on their turn, making the game run faster. It's also much easier to use hold/ready actions for both me as a DM and the players.

 

[adamc]

I think for me the real question is whether using other mechanisms that access a valid, current account would be illegal. It's hard for me to imagine them prosecuting that, but I don't really want to argue with them about it either -- better just to leave it behind.

I'm not much attracted to trying to use the materials without a current account, although the fact that they've announced updates will stop in March will surely cause others to do so; much as I might like to imagine I'm chaotic good, I'm largely lawful good in practice.

(Conceptually, their iron grip on the "intellectual property" is about the only thing I really dislike about 4e. A world where more people could contribute would be a world with better source material.)

 

[adamc]

For what it's worth, I tried Hero Lab, but the font size is too small for my aging eyes. I really would like a program that used 4e content (with an active license, blah blah blah), but which allowed you to do more customization for home-brew. But I suppose it's too small a market.

On the plus side, for reasons I don't understand, Character Builder and Adventure Tools started loading reliably for me again. (I actually had a support incident with Wizards going, with screenshots showing the problem, etc. across multiple browsers -- and then it started working for me again.) So, for the moment, it's back to being a workable, if not ideal, solution.

However, it got me thinking more about what I don't like about 4e. I don't like feeling locked into their system, with poor options. Some of that is my fault, for sure -- the CB is very convenient, but once you've built characters with it, they would be a pain to build otherwise (too many books and errata). Assuming I ever do finish this campaign, I doubt I will sign up for that again. That may limit my options in other ways; so be it.