What were the 3 software developers ordered to cease and dissist?

[Twin Rose]

Re: Three companies?

Has PcGen actually received anything “official” yet, i.e. a letter or other document? Are the other 2 companies getting a cease and desist orders or just a slap on the wrist like PcGen has apparently received? If this rumor is true, I’d think that an “official” contact would have gone out by know to the parties in question. Is there any other source to the validity of this situation other than a post on a message board?

A representative from Wizard's of the Coast wanted a chance to go and speak with the folks at PCGen personally, because he had no ill will against them. That chance came at GenCon, because they were all there. The other 2 companies were not there, so didn't get this opportunity. I felt this was an amazing show of good faith on the part of Wizards of the Coast to approach them personally, to say, "This is what will happen if you don't do X." and to give them a 30 day grace period as though they had been following the OGL from the start - which the folks at PCGen had thought in a previous thread on this board that they did not have to do.

It is encouraging to me that the larger companies will do things like this, and I've learned personally that if you are willing to work with WOTC, they are willing to work with you. True, it takes some time for them to notice you, but once they do they aren't going to throw a hammer at you.

 

[kingpaul]

Woo-hoo

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pcgen/message/43136

Hey all,

This is an update, expect a full blown Press Release tonight/tomorrow sometime...

I _just_ got off the phone with Anthony Valterra (and that's the correct spelling of his name btw), and here's the short and sweet...

Code Wise: All random functiond (Dice Rolling) is considered 'insteractive' and to be D20 licensed that can't be, but if it's just OGL compliancy then we can. ALL references to mechanics MUST be removed from Code to be compliant, so they go into the list files, which IS acceptable AND compliant. The code itself is merely a reader/interpreter of what it finds in the list files, so no hard coding of anything in the code itself. What does this mean? Well the Stats and Saves are FINALLY going to be fully in the list files so that people can not only change the names and add/remove stats, but you will be able to define EXACTLY what they each do. COMPLETE and TOTAL customization of stats! YAY! (This will also make it a LOT easier to work on non-D20 materials as well, THAT is definately a bonus as we DID have multiple conversations with non-D20 publishers at GenCon asking about PCGen Support!!!!)

List Wise: A number of changes to make them easier to read, understand, convert to XML, etc will be done. More tags added, cleaner look and feel over all.

As for what's missing? ALL the NON-SRD Wizards Material is gone. It will stay gone until/if we get permission to re-include it. We are looking at options, and yes, discussing this with Wizards to see how we can do so. And in regards to that, Wizards has been VERY cool and EASY to deal with about this, especially Anthony Valterra, the man sought US out to talk to us when he didn't need to.

That's the short and skinny... expect the <WWF Announcer Voice> OFFICIAL PCGEN & WIZARDS OF THE COAST PRESS RELEASE SOON!!! </WWF Announcer Voice>.

Mynex

- #1 Evil Assistant to the PCGen Code Monkeys
- List files & Documentation Silverback
- RPG Reviews Editor & Reviewer

 

[Knightcrawler]

PCGen vs. E-Tools

Okay, basically it boils down to everyone comparing PCGen with E-Tools. Personally I think that they each target slightly different segments of the market.

E-Tools has the slick interface and all the bells and wistles that a low end computer users is looking for. It provides a starting framework and complete documentation of said framework.

PCGen is tailored more to people that are a little more computer savy. Also it only provides the bases facts, no a complete description or explanation of a feat, skill, item, etc. The PCGen Team wants to make sure that the PCGen data files are NOT a replacement for any book.

I myself have coded several of the sources for PCGen. While its easy to get into initially it is very time consuming and can be very aggravating. We are not out to create competition for E-Tools. I would be immensly happy if E-Tools was a huge success.

As to how good or bad E-Tools is I cannot say anything. I won't get my copy of it until this weekend. But even then I will try to be constructive in my criticism. I've played D&D for nearly 20 years now, all three editions. I want to see WotC succeed.

With the lines of communication open now between WotC and PCGen it means a better future for PCGen not the death of it. I think it is in WotC interest to see PCGen continue. It makes people want to buy more books not less of them.

Knightcrawler
-PCGen LST Monkey
-MM Race Munchkin

 

[Leopold]

minor update from mynex..pass the word along.

This is an update, expect a full blown Press Release
tonight/tomorrow sometime...

I _just_ got off the phone with Anthony Valterra (and that's the
correct spelling of his name btw), and here's the short and sweet...

Code Wise: All random functiond (Dice Rolling) is
considered 'insteractive' and to be D20 licensed that can't be, but
if it's just OGL compliancy then we can. ALL references to
mechanics MUST be removed from Code to be compliant, so they go into
the list files, which IS acceptable AND compliant. The code itself
is merely a reader/interpreter of what it finds in the list files,
so no hard coding of anything in the code itself. What does this
mean? Well the Stats and Saves are FINALLY going to be fully in the
list files so that people can not only change the names and
add/remove stats, but you will be able to define EXACTLY what they
each do. COMPLETE and TOTAL customization of stats! YAY! (This will
also make it a LOT easier to work on non-D20 materials as well, THAT
is definately a bonus as we DID have multiple conversations with non-
D20 publishers at GenCon asking about PCGen Support!!!!)

List Wise: A number of changes to make them easier to read,
understand, convert to XML, etc will be done. More tags added,
cleaner look and feel over all.

As for what's missing? ALL the NON-SRD Wizards Material is gone.
It will stay gone until/if we get permission to re-include it. We
are looking at options, and yes, discussing this with Wizards to see
how we can do so. And in regards to that, Wizards has been VERY
cool and EASY to deal with about this, especially Anthony Valterra,
the man sought US out to talk to us when he didn't need to.

That's the short and skinny... expect the <WWF Announcer Voice>
OFFICIAL PCGEN & WIZARDS OF THE COAST PRESS RELEASE SOON!!! </WWF
Announcer Voice>.

Mynex

- #1 Evil Assistant to the PCGen Code Monkeys
- List files & Documentation Silverback
- RPG Reviews Editor & Reviewer

 

[Cergorach]

Re: Re: Three companies?

<snip> I felt this was an amazing show of good faith on the part of Wizards of the Coast to approach them personally, to say, "This is what will happen if you don't do X." and to give them a 30 day grace period as though they had been following the OGL from the start - which the folks at PCGen had thought in a previous thread on this board that they did not have to do.

No offense Twin, but whether or not they HAVE to follow the OGL is debateble, only way to set things straight is to go to court. The problem is that in the US right and wrong are decided by who has the most money, and the folks over at PcGen are piss poor in comperison to WotC. In other words they have no other option than accept every which way the wind blows...

It is encouraging to me that the larger companies will do things like this, <snip>[/B]

Again no offense, but to "do things like this" is a nessecity for WotC. You might not have noticed but WotC is currently nothing more than a house of cards that's trying to stay in the eye of the storm. On one side there's a lot of scrunity from big daddy Hasbro lately about how WotC runs it's business (anyone remember th bean pushers?). Then we have the global economic slump that's affecting everyone. And of course we have a fan base that's unpredictable at best. If WotC pulls a Homer in front of BD Hasbro they are pretty screwd, and pissing of a big piece of revenue is not the way to go about business.

Some might say (and rightly so) that the online community is very small compared to the overall D&D community. Maybe 5% of the entire customer base, but we are responsible for more than 10% of the revenue generated (a 10% drop in sales is going to get the attention of BD Hasbro). Also online fans are the people that spread the game and the people that are the links to the rest of the community (how many on here are just one of a group, the rest of the group often isn't online?).

Now i really dig the guys and girls over at WotC that are gamers at heart, but i have this little problem with the bean pushers so to speak...

 

[Sm!rk]

Re: minor update from mynex..pass the word along.

Code Wise: All random functiond (Dice Rolling) is
considered 'insteractive' and to be D20 licensed that can't be, but
if it's just OGL compliancy then we can. ALL references to
mechanics MUST be removed from Code to be compliant, so they go into
the list files, which IS acceptable AND compliant.

Ok, if it can't be interactive, how does moving it out of the Java code and putting it into lst or xml "code" make it acceptable? Am I splitting hairs or missing something?

cool and EASY to deal with about this, especially Anthony Valterra,
the man sought US out to talk to us when he didn't need to.

Beware wolves in sheep's clothing, or is it beware those bearing gifts? One of them is apprioprate here

 

[smetzger]

Re: minor update from mynex..pass the word along.

Code Wise: All random functiond (Dice Rolling) is
considered 'insteractive' and to be D20 licensed that can't be, but
if it's just OGL compliancy then we can.

Thats a much more restrictive definition than the d20 license:

· "Interactive Game": means a piece of computer gaming software that is designed to accept inputs from human players or their agents, and use rules to resolve the success or failure of those inputs, and return some indication of the results of those inputs to the users.

So, I don't believe that PCGen has ever "resolved the success or failure" of an input. Rolling attributes is hardly a success or a failure.

However, one thing that is not in the SRD that is kind of necessary for a character generation program is Table 3-2 on p.22 of the PHB. Shows, XP, max class and cross class skill points (these may be somewhere else), when feats are rewarded, and when ability score increases. You can't use that information in an OGL product or a d20 product.

As I see it PCGen can go a couple of routes.
1) Thumb their nose at WOTC and all d20 companies and continue on. They may not even be breaking any laws by doing this since game mechanics are not copyrightable.
2) Get permission from every copyright holder before using their material.
3) Separate everything into data or code. Release the data as d20 or OGL and release the program under whatever license they want to.

 

[Twin Rose]

Re: Re: Re: Three companies?

No offense Twin, but whether or not they HAVE to follow the OGL is debateble, only way to set things straight is to go to court. The problem is that in the US right and wrong are decided by who has the most money, and the folks over at PcGen are piss poor in comperison to WotC. In other words they have no other option than accept every which way the wind blows...

No, it's not debatable. If someone releases their content under the Open Gaming License, they have a reasonable belief that it is safeguarded by the Open Gaming License. The legality is ther,e and we've all been dealing with WOTC enough lately to know that it is, and aren't going to bother fighting about it.

Again no offense, but to "do things like this" is a nessecity for WotC.

Previous posts on this board suggested that PCGen didn't follow the Open Gaming License. They are now attempting to do so. The OGL protects the licensor as well as the licensee from certain things, and it is a wonderful tool for everyone involved. "Big money" has nothing to do with it. I think the PCGen folks would readily agree that the 30 day breach/cure period is much preferable to getting drug into court.

 

[smetzger]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Three companies?

No, it's not debatable. If someone releases their content under the Open Gaming License, they have a reasonable belief that it is safeguarded by the Open Gaming License. The legality is ther,e and we've all been dealing with WOTC enough lately to know that it is, and aren't going to bother fighting about it.

Of course if you release under OGL or d20 you have to follow the license. He was not saying that. He is saying that it is debatable if you have to use the OGL. Since game mechanics are not copyrightable it is certainly up in the air about if you can develop D&D software (or other D&D material for that matter) without using the d20 license or OGL. The record companies litigation against Napster was much more clear cut than this, and look how long it took, how much money the record companies used up, and how ultimately ineffective that was. Using d20 or OGL gives you a reasonable assurance from WOTC that they will not sue you. Just because you do not use the OGL or d20 doesn't mean that you are breaking the law.

 

[Cergorach]

Thanks Smetzer, that's exactly what i meant.