RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Sure there are going to be pirates. I found Danse Macabre (from White Wolf) out there mere days after release. You know what? I bought the PDF anyway.
The best way to fight piracy is to share in the first place.
http://questioncopyright.org/node/535
This post on QCO is Nina Paley getting frustrated with people ASKING her all the time. I'd rather have my inbox indunated with emails of people who don't get Creative Commons licensing asking me for permission to use this or this in their books than sending DCMA takedown notices. I'll only have to use DCMA takedown notices against cheeky publishers who think they can post my stuff and say they wrote it (with a healthy dose of threatening to sue for Plagarism or outright Fraud).
Well there's an important distinction there. If I create a character or something I don't want to relinquish control. I should have that right.
A publisher, whether it be White Wolf, Paizo, or Random House, publishes for profit. They should retain the right to pursue and punish people who distribute w/o permission. Nina Paley may be sick and tired of people asking her 'can I use this?' but it's preferable than her work she doesn't want distributed outside her control showing up where she doesn't want it. I share my work willingly, but I'd be rather upset if it showed up in someone else's book w/o credit.
(Just like Paizo would be upset if PDFs of Rise of the Runelords showed up on someone's hard drive w/o it being paid for)
I find WotC's decision to pull their PDFs short sighted, but it's their choice to make. Going around them isn't the correct answer. They have the right to control the distribution of their content. They may lose hypothetical sales to pirates, but they lost concrete sales by denying me the ability to purchase the PDFs.
You choose whether or not to pursue people, in your own example. Everyone has that right.
To use your example, Elton. Care to post your credit card info here in the forum? After all it would prevent people stealing it when you share it willingly.
Edit: Edited for clarity.
|
The Vatican didn't pick some guy off the street to do the Sistine Chappel. They chose Michalango. Rembrant didn't become famous because he could draw the duck on the pack of matches (anyone remember those ads?) Classical artists had reputation.
OT
Sorry, but the name of one of the most prominent Renaissance artists spelled that way sounds more like an unholy offspring between a fictional mexican wrestler and some sort of brasilian-themed character from the Street Fighter franchise.
It made me laugh and grimace at the same time. ;)
/OT
For the record, I prefer the mechanics of 4E, and was a WotC customer for the first year or so of 4E.and now?
Now about the only thing I ever buy from them is a single set of dungeon tiles for use in Pathfinder, though even those purchases are on life support since the price increase.
And no, it isn't solely because of the PDFs. A detailed discussion of the reasons is off topic, but in short, it was: The PDFs, the OGL/GSL debacle, system revisions as errata, the failure to deliver on DDI, etc. More recently the stealth 4.5/essentials fiasco and the effective de-funding of organized play have only strengthened my belief that they are not a company I wish to patronize.
To use your example, Elton. Care to post your credit card info here in the forum? After all it would prevent people stealing it when you share it willingly.
I agree with most of what you said, but I feel compelled to point out that IP violations, unlike theft, are not a zero-sum game. Equating the two merely clouds the issue (imo). I think IP rights advocates would be on much stronger footing if they abandoned the demonstrably inaccurate theft analogy.
Lest anyone get their feathers ruffled, this is not an endorsement of IP rights violations. It is simply the observation that IP violations and theft are not identical.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
The Vatican didn't pick some guy off the street to do the Sistine Chappel. They chose Michalango. Rembrant didn't become famous because he could draw the duck on the pack of matches (anyone remember those ads?) Classical artists had reputation.
OT
Sorry, but the name of one of the most prominent Renaissance artists spelled that way sounds more like an unholy offspring between a fictional mexican wrestler and some sort of brasilian-themed character from the Street Fighter franchise.
It made me laugh and grimace at the same time. ;)
/OT
Sorry, my spelling sucks and this computer doesn't have an integrated spell check in IE. (and I was too lazy to look it up.)
Mea Culpa
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
To use your example, Elton. Care to post your credit card info here in the forum? After all it would prevent people stealing it when you share it willingly.I agree with most of what you said, but I feel compelled to point out that IP violations, unlike theft, are not a zero-sum game. Equating the two merely clouds the issue (imo). I think IP rights advocates would be on much stronger footing if they abandoned the demonstrably inaccurate theft analogy.
Lest anyone get their feathers ruffled, this is not an endorsement of IP rights violations. It is simply the observation that IP violations and theft are not identical.
It's a flawed analogy, but I still think it's a good one.
Our hosts choose to use a specific method of distributing their material electronically. They rely on that method (in part) for profit. To suggest that by reducing piracy they should make their work free for anyone to grab is akin to putting your credit card info on the net because someone may take it anyway. Either way, it's taking someone's labor (whether it be direct product, or the credit card bill) and not giving them the value they see it's worth.
It's not about theft to me Bugley, it's about the right to control one's ideas and work. When James, Lisa, Vic, et al. are dust, then let the information be free.
(and before anyone gets started about the extension of copyrights and trademarks. I'm talking something published just a few years ago. Not Mickey Mouse or Batman.)
Sure there are going to be pirates. I found Danse Macabre (from White Wolf) out there mere days after release. You know what? I bought the PDF anyway.
The best way to fight piracy is to share in the first place.
http://questioncopyright.org/node/535
This post on QCO is Nina Paley getting frustrated with people ASKING her all the time. I'd rather have my inbox indunated with emails of people who don't get Creative Commons licensing asking me for permission to use this or this in their books than sending DCMA takedown notices. I'll only have to use DCMA takedown notices against cheeky publishers who think they can post my stuff and say they wrote it (with a healthy dose of threatening to sue for Plagarism or outright Fraud).
Well there's an important distinction there. If I create a character or something I don't want to relinquish control. I should have that right.
A publisher, whether it be White Wolf, Paizo, or Random House, publishes for profit. They should retain the right to pursue and punish people who distribute w/o permission. Nina Paley may be sick and tired of people asking her 'can I use this?' but it's preferable than her work she doesn't want distributed outside her control showing up where she doesn't want it. I share my work willingly, but I'd be rather upset if it showed up in someone else's book w/o credit.
(Just like Paizo would be upset if PDFs of Rise of the Runelords showed up on someone's hard drive w/o it being paid for)
I find WotC's decision to pull their PDFs short sighted, but it's their choice to make. Going around them isn't the correct answer. They have the right to control the distribution of their content. They may lose hypothetical sales to pirates, but they lost concrete sales by denying me the ability to purchase the PDFs.
You choose whether or not to pursue people, in your own example. Everyone has that right.
To use your example, Elton. Care to...
A credit card is different than something created and published. A credit card number is different than say, the Thinker, or the Venus de Milo, or Dracula.
A credit card number is the same like a name, you use it for purchases, but you can't share that. A creative work is different. Written prose, poetry, a painting is at it's best when published. A credit card number is at it's best not published. Written prose, poetry, sculpture, a painting, or a quilt is not at its best when hoarded for private use.
However, when you publish a work, and you use Copyright to protect it, it's the same as being an indiangiver, except your stealing. You're telling your customer what he can and cannot do with his private property.
A credit card number is private property for the individual who holds it. The information in a published work is the private property of someone who buys that work. After all, after he reads it its imprinted in his brain. Do not, sir, do not confuse a credit card number with an intellectual monopoly. EVER! The Copyright Law and the Anti-Trust Laws are pretty much at odds with each other. One sets up an unfair monopoly and can be used for Thought Police action; the other breaks monopolies.
While the U.S. Constitution does reserve the right for an individual to gain from his Written Work and Patented Invention, it was meant for a reasonable limited time. Like 5 to 14 years. A credit card number is part of a person's identity and allows access to an unsecured loan provided by the bank. An unsecured loan which will increase in interest payback because they are so risky.
A person's identity and an intellectual monopoly are not the same thing. A person's credit card has to be restricted for a good reason. An intellectual monopoly has restrictions for bad reasons.
THINK ABOUT THAT!
It's a flawed analogy, but I still think it's a good one.
Our hosts choose to use a specific method of distributing their material electronically. They rely on that method (in part) for profit. To suggest that by reducing piracy they should make their work free for anyone to grab is akin to putting your credit card info on the net because someone may take it anyway. Either way, it's taking someone's labor (whether it be direct product, or the credit card bill) and not giving them the value they see it's worth.
It's not about theft to me Bugley, it's about the right to control one's ideas and work. When James, Lisa, Vic, et al. are dust, then let the information be free.
(and before anyone gets started about the extension of copyrights and trademarks. I'm talking something published just a few years ago. Not Mickey Mouse or Batman.)
I totally support IP rights, whether I know the creators (like I do in Paizo's case) or not. But IP violations aren't a zero-sum game, so I'm bothered by the "it's like you're stealing a car" bit.
To me, it seems that IP violations should remain the purview of civil, rather than criminal, law. I also think that some of the civil fines that have been imposed (50k per song, or whatever) are totally crazy. In BugleyLand(tm), the penalty for a intellectual property violation would be like 5x-10x the retail value of the product and a public apology published at the offender's expense. Pirated a movie? That's $200.00*, please -- no matter how many times it was downloaded. Of course, all of those people are liable as well...
But again, that's just my opinion, and IANAL.
*Assuming the DVD retails for $20. Some would be less.
In other words... No, Elton doesn't want to share his credit card to avoid 'pirating' it.
you'll never learn the difference between private property and a government sponsored monopoly. Read some books by Stephen Kansella then come back.
The difference between a Credit Card number and something created by you is clear. A credit card number has to do with a rivalrous commodity -- Money. A novel, a roleplaying game, or a setting has to do with nonrivalrous commodity -- ideas.
A non-rivalrous commodity is something that can be copied. It's value increases with each copy made. A Rivalrous commodity is limited in the amount that its available. Suppose if I steal your bicycle. I stole an item of your private property. So you would be forced to take the bus.
However, if I copied your bicycle: we both have a bicycle we can ride. The same thing goes with a non-rivalrous good. If I stole your physical copy of Ptolus (or from Monte Cook) you can call the cops on me and have me put in jail. But if I were to copy it, we both have a copy. I didn't steal anything, plus the value of the item has increased.
While I don't want to chime in on the morality of others, I only want to say that if I create something, whether that something be a song, a poem, a book, a sculpture, a painting, etc., then I get to decide who can do what with that thing I created. I invested my own energy and creativity into making that thing and so one of the rights I should expect is the right to determine who can do what with the thing I created. If I want to give that thing away to others, that's my right. If I want to ask others to give me money for their use of that thing, that's my right. If others do not want to pay whatever it is I ask for the use or ownership of the thing I created, that's their right. They are no worse off than they were previous to me showing them the thing I created.
Just saying, that if someone invests their own time and energy into making something, they are well within their rights to expect be able to dictate the terms required for others benefiting from or using the thing which they created.
Ok, that is all :)
|
|
Sorry, my spelling sucks and this computer doesn't have an integrated spell check in IE. (and I was too lazy to look it up.)
Mea Culpa
Worry not, I had enough spare time, booze and sick imagination to write my very own Michalango NPC, wandering ogre gladiator, and aknowledged artist of dismemberment.
The sad thing is - I'd prolly buy it. The whole "Mee-cha- LAAAAAANG-goooo!" image sold me on it.
While I don't want to chime in on the morality of others, I only want to say that if I create something, whether that something be a song, a poem, a book, a sculpture, a painting, etc., then I get to decide who can do what with that thing I created. I invested my own energy and creativity into making that thing and so one of the rights I should expect is the right to determine who can do what with the thing I created. If I want to give that thing away to others, that's my right. If I want to ask others to give me money for their use of that thing, that's my right. If others do not want to pay whatever it is I ask for the use or ownership of the thing I created, that's their right. They are no worse off than they were previous to me showing them the thing I created.
Just saying, that if someone invests their own time and energy into making something, they are well within their rights to expect be able to dictate the terms required for others benefiting from or using the thing which they created.
Ok, that is all :)
Unless they are doing a parody of it.
Parodies are cool!
In general. I like Wierd Al. :D
I can see WotC not wanting to release PDF's of their current run material (I imagine it hasn't slowed the true pirates down much, but at least the argument itself is understandable). But pulling PDFs of OOP material from previous additions? What sales were they losing to piracy on those? Even if 99% of people were pulling down pirated copies (I don't think it was, but it's a nice hyperbolic example), even the 1% remaining is pure gravy. The only true effect WotC had with the move was propping up the secondary dead tree market.
When WotC pulled all their PDFs, I was in the midst of collecting all of the 2e Planescape material I could find. Before, I had the option of finding a pirated copy or paying for one; I chose the latter because I believe it's the right thing to do. Now, if I want Planescape PDFs, my only option is to find pirated material. I'm not going to, because I still feel it's not right, but my frustration hasn't helped my improve my feelings toward WotC.
|
In other words... No, Elton doesn't want to share his credit card to avoid 'pirating' it.you'll never learn the difference between private property and a government sponsored monopoly. Read some books by Stephen Kansella then come back.
The difference between a Credit Card number and something created by you is clear. A credit card number has to do with a rivalrous commodity -- Money. A novel, a roleplaying game, or a setting has to do with nonrivalrous commodity -- ideas.
A non-rivalrous commodity is something that can be copied. It's value increases with each copy made. A Rivalrous commodity is limited in the amount that its available. Suppose if I steal your bicycle. I stole an item of your private property. So you would be forced to take the bus.
However, if I copied your bicycle: we both have a bicycle we can ride. The same thing goes with a non-rivalrous good. If I stole your physical copy of Ptolus (or from Monte Cook) you can call the cops on me and have me put in jail. But if I were to copy it, we both have a copy. I didn't steal anything, plus the value of the item has increased.
I agree with you up to a point.
Of course, the owner a a book you copy didn't lose anything by you copying it, but the creator could lose something.If you had bought the book/pdf in case you wouldn't have been able to copy it, he lost one sale of the item, decreasing the monetary value that the ownership of the rights to said item has to him.
The creator invested time and work into the item, maybe he wants to live from the money he makes selling copies. If you fetch your copy for free, denying him this money, he loses. If his main goal was the spreading of his work/idea and he didn't intend to make money with it, he would probably have found a way to make it available for free, legally.
It really was a stupid over-reaction they did.
Not really. It would be an over-reaction if the reason they gave us was the actual one - the piracy nonsense.
The real reason was twofold: 1: FU, 2: We want 3e dead.
For that, it was hardly an overreaction. It didn't help nearly enough.
*Yawn* yes, yes, bad evil WotC trying to put the 3rds down.
Yet funny, they also pulled their 4e pdfs as well, which would be silly if they were trying to only kill older editions. But let us not let logic get in the way of our nerdrage and all that.
Down with the Hasbro lackeys!
Pull your head out of the sand. Pulling the PDFs was a marketing decision. The older PDFs were direct competition with the new game, and PDFs of that rule set would have cut into their shiny new DDI subscription base.
It was dollar signs that prompted the decision and if you think it was anything else, well I've got this really amazing beachfront property for sale in Arizona...
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
However, if I copied your bicycle: we both have a bicycle we can ride. The same thing goes with a non-rivalrous good. If I stole your physical copy of Ptolus (or from Monte Cook) you can call the cops on me and have me put in jail. But if I were to copy it, we both have a copy. I didn't steal anything, plus the value of the item has increased.
Wow, you fail economics forever. increasing the supply of something does not increase the value. And if you copy my 'bicycle' then you deny the builder of my bicycle the right to control their product.
But I see, you're all for taking someone else's labor and putting it out there for free to 'stop piracy'. But you're not willing to put something of yours (in this case, your credit rating) out there for others to use for free.
Come on Elton. Surely you'll prevent piracy of your credit cards by putting the information out there to be freely copied.
I bought a copy of Tomb of the Iron Medusa for a friend, who loved Mud Sorcerers Tomb. By Elton's logic, I should have just copied it at work.
However, if I copied your bicycle: we both have a bicycle we can ride. The same thing goes with a non-rivalrous good. If I stole your physical copy of Ptolus (or from Monte Cook) you can call the cops on me and have me put in jail. But if I were to copy it, we both have a copy. I didn't steal anything, plus the value of the item has increased.
Wow, you fail economics forever. increasing the supply of something does not increase the value. And if you copy my 'bicycle' then you deny the builder of my bicycle the right to control their product.
But I see, you're all for taking someone else's labor and putting it out there for free to 'stop piracy'. But you're not willing to put something of yours (in this case, your credit rating) out there for others to use for free.
Come on Elton. Surely you'll prevent piracy of your credit cards by putting the information out there to be freely copied.
I bought a copy of Tomb of the Iron Medusa for a friend, who loved Mud Sorcerers Tomb. By Elton's logic, I should have just copied it at work.
One's Credit Card Number is an access to an unsecured loan. If I put that out there, you will being buying items at my expense. If I weren't poor and destitute already; I'd have earned a credit card debt that would put me in jail.
Now, Mathew Morris, have you heard of Carson of Venus? The Wizard of Venus? Perhaps Lluana of Gathol?
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
But I see, you're all for taking someone else's labor and putting it out there for free to 'stop piracy'. But you're not willing to put something of yours (in this case, your credit rating) out there for others to use for free.Come on Elton. Surely you'll prevent piracy of your credit cards by putting the information out there to be freely copied.
I bought a copy of Tomb of the Iron Medusa for a friend, who loved Mud Sorcerers Tomb. By Elton's logic, I should have just copied it at work.
One's Credit Card Number is an access to an unsecured loan. If I put that out there, you will being buying items at my expense. If I weren't poor and destitute already; I'd have earned a credit card debt that would put me in jail.
Now, Mathew Morris, have you heard of Carson of Venus? The Wizard of Venus? Perhaps Lluana of Gathol?
And in 'copying' material that others put out for purchase, you're taking items at *their* expense.
I had a copy of Wizard of Venus years ago, it was attached to another work of Burroughs. And I read all of the Martian books, and the Venus books. All purchased dead tree style. I'm collecting the Warlord of Mars books from Dynamite comics. I hate the way they draw Dejah Thoris though.
Wow, you fail economics forever. increasing the supply of something does not increase the value.
That depends on the thing involved. If it's a physical product, then of course it doesn't increase its value. It reduces it's scarcity. That's a decrease in value
But if it's an idea, I would agree that it increases its value. There's really no such thing as scarcity with ideas.The trouble with copyright, intellectually, is the specific expressed content of a copyrighted work is somewhere in between an idea and a physical product. Copying it does decrease scarcity, but it's not a simple transfer of possession. The value of the ideas contained in the expression rise in value because they are more widely shared.
And if you copy my 'bicycle' then you deny the builder of my bicycle the right to control their product.
But is the idea of the bicycle really your bicycle builder's product? No. The individual parts he makes would be, but by copying them, you're not using the parts he made so they're not his product.
Come on Elton. Surely you'll prevent piracy of your credit cards by putting the information out there to be freely copied.
That's really not the same thing. It's not even close. A credit card number is neither intellectual property nor, in itself, an idea. It's access to a service with a lender.
Now, Mathew Morris, have you heard of Carson of Venus? The Wizard of Venus? Perhaps Lluana of Gathol?It's Llana of Gathol. :)
Out of curiosity, what is the connection to the conversation at hand?
Right, I only had a cursory look at it while reading chapter 5 of "Against Intellectual Monopoly."
I'm trying to convince Mr. Monopolist up there that it's better for the economy if Wizards had stiff competition caused by others for "their intellectual monopolies." I.E. the PDFs would be available, and in print, if there was no copyright.
Of course, Wizards would be making money hand over fist, as Mr. Watt did with the Steam Engine when his Patent ran out in 1801 (he patented the Steam Engine for 25 years). Then Wizards' production values would increase and be at the roof! When you buy a Wizards PDF from another printer, it would be of average or worse quality. However, when you buy a Wizards PDF from Wizards, it would be the very best quality -- and they would share a percentage of the profit with the author because they would use a certain mark that showed how much you would be paying -- and I bet you would be willing to fork over more money than usual because Wizards would print their books at the highest possible quality.
Glossy pages, good magazine quality acid-free paper, leather bound book, with cloth bookmarks, with a beautiful painting or photo on the inside cover . . . they'd go all out to make a real collectible book. And collectors would pay good money for those things.
The same with Paizo. Paizo would also do the same thing with Golarion. Leather bound, with cloth markers, real high quality acid-free paper with magazine gloss finish, wonderful art. Collectibility, man, collectiblity. Plus a percentage of the profit will be shared with the authors. And you know how much of a percentage. No doubt you would pay very good money to have a copy of Golarion like that.
It would be like Red Hat Linux competing with the other Linux distributors of Red Hat Linux. Everyone else would output cheap or moderately priced versions of Dungeons and Dragons products. But if you want the best, you know what company outputs the best. Wizards of the Coast and Paizo.
Oh, and Mr. Monopolist, I don't know what goes on in those titles I mentioned. They are owned by the Tarazana company until . . . 2014 (or until Disney steals Mickey Mouse again with another Mickey Mouse Law). The Tarzana Company sits on their butts, not writing sequels to these books. They just license the books out to Disney or some other movie studio and wait until some somebody tries to resurrect the material and then they sue them.
Those books have been out of print for years, and I'd love to read them. However, I have to wait until 2014 to 2016.
Oh yes, something very important.
The CRAP during the d20 boom would be weeded out by innovative competitors if there was stiff competition. Plus there would be some settings that would be best sellers -- everyone would be expanding on them.
Dragonlance
Conan the Barbarian, wait a sec. Isn't the Conan World technically in the public domain by now? It's been more than 70 years since the original writer died.
Midnight
Eberron
Forgotten Realms
Dark Sun
The Lord of the Rings (although this would probably be transformed completely out of recognition -- oh wait, it already has! HA!).
Ptolus
While certain properties would still be in print since they reach a limited audience.
Hollow World
Mystara
Birthright
Tekumel (although with the right publisher -- the setting could appeal to a lot of people)
Harry Potter (I can only see an RPG based off of Harry Potter appealing to the 12-15 year-old player).
But most importantly, the CRAP would have been weeded out.
Are there any places on the web authorized to sell the pdfs LEGALLY? I'm looking to downsize my print collection (several bookcases IS getting a little ridiculous) and instead keep e-copies of most products.
Thanks in advance.
Well, if/when you're ready to get rid of your dead tree collection, let me know. I've wanted to complete my 3.x collection for a while now.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
But is the idea of the bicycle really your bicycle builder's product? No. The individual parts he makes would be, but by copying them, you're not using the parts he made so they're not his product.
The idea of a bicycle? No. If say schwinn or whomever designed propriatary tech, then copying their patented tech *is* stealing the research and development (and labor) put into it.
Come on Elton. Surely you'll prevent piracy of your credit cards by putting the information out there to be freely copied.
That's really not the same thing. It's not even close. A credit card number is neither intellectual property nor, in itself, an idea. It's access to a service with a lender.
Actually for Elton's example it's the exact same thing. He was arguing that
The best way to fight piracy is to share in the first place.
So I was asking him to put money where his mouth is. If he feels that Paizo/WotC/Rite/Me should put our work out there and not charge anything for our labor, with the goal of 'fighting piracy' then he should put his credit card info out there to 'fight credit card theft'.
My work is just that, mine. What I chose to do with it is my decision.
To put it another way, we have exclusivity rules for new drugs, to allow companies to make back the money spent not only on the R&D on that drug but also for those projects that came to dead ends. If Avantis was allowed to make a generic version of a drug as soon as it was released, no one would ever develop a new drug. They couldn't afford to. If Paizo couldn't see making a profit on Treerazor, then he'd still be a demon in James' notebook.
Mr. Everyone except me should give their work away doesn't want to see that.
Does this mean that people make (apparently) stupid decisions with their IP? Yes, this entire thread started about 'how do I get a product that's no longer made.'
Clearly the WotC products that are out of print have value. Enough that people want to expend their labor (expressed as money) to aquire them. How valuable are they? Well that varies from person to person. *If* WotC made them available for X, and you valued them as less than X, you'd not buy them. To say 'well I'm going to copy them, and they should just share them' is the whining of a petulant child.
As to 'ideas being more valuable if shared'. There's a difference between setting a swords and hot babe's story on Mars, and setting it in Barsoom. There's a differnce between writing a superhero comic, and writing the X-men. The former is taking ideas. The second is taking property.
Edit: Wanted to add, that IP is an example of decreasing the value of something by sharing it. Part of the reason we buy Paizo made products is the quality. By sharing the OGL, one could argue that you decrease the value of the OGL because for every Paizo that came out, there were five Fast Forward Entertainments. It is my memory that many retailers became gunshy of 3PP because they ended up with crap on their shelves that wouldn't move. Companies like Paizo didn't increase the value of the OGL, they increased the value of their brand.
Considering the x-men/doom patrol issue, your comments intrigue, Matt. And I completely disagree with you on the credit card issue -you should have gone with something less tangible.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Considering the x-men/doom patrol issue, your comments intrigue, Matt. And I completely disagree with you on the credit card issue -you should have gone with something less tangible.
It may not be the perfect analogy, but it is the frist thing that came to mind.
I just found it amusing that his idea of 'fighting piracy' was to basically surrender any rights to it. So why not give your credit card info out to 'fight theft'? I mean a person's credit report and lack of debt are the result of their hard work at keeping debt under control. Just like 'Rise of the Runelords' is the result of the hard work of the people who wrote/edited/produced it.
Elton wants to take advantage of others' work for no cost. He doesn't want others to take advantage of his work to stay out of debt. I see that as a double standard.
Aside, it's one of my weaknesses of fiction, I'm better playing in someone else's playground rather than building my own.
Oh, and I thought it was that the Doom Patrol/X-men thing was a coincidence. Let me check CBLR...
Ok, here he mentions it's in his book, but leans towards coincidence.
Considering the x-men/doom patrol issue, your comments intrigue, Matt. And I completely disagree with you on the credit card issue -you should have gone with something less tangible.It may not be the perfect analogy, but it is the frist thing that came to mind.
I just found it amusing that his idea of 'fighting piracy' was to basically surrender any rights to it. So why not give your credit card info out to 'fight theft'? I mean a person's credit report and lack of debt are the result of their hard work at keeping debt under control. Just like 'Rise of the Runelords' is the result of the hard work of the people who wrote/edited/produced it.
Elton wants to take advantage of others' work for no cost. He doesn't want others to take advantage of his work to stay out of debt. I see that as a double standard.
Aside, it's one of my weaknesses of fiction, I'm better playing in someone else's playground rather than building my own.
Oh, and I thought it was that the Doom Patrol/X-men thing was a coincidence. Let me check CBLR...
Ok, here he mentions it's in his book, but leans towards coincidence.
i am a believer that once is happenstance etc. but there is just too much similarity between the two teams for it to have been an accident. I also fear i disagree with you here on the wotc issue. While yes, they have the right to make stupid decisions with their ip, they should reap the whirlwind on them as well.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
i am a believer that once is happenstance etc. but there is just too much similarity between the two teams for it to have been an accident. I also fear i disagree with you here on the wotc issue. While yes, they have the right to make stupid decisions with their ip, they should reap the whirlwind on them as well.
You're allowed to disagree ;-)
In the PDF case, I think they *have* reaped the whirlwind. They've lost PDF sales, they've lost consumer goodwill, they've lost another (free) method to see which classics they should 'revisit' and which won't be profitable. I just don't see theft as a justified response to their stupidity.
The advent of PDF (and indeed print-on-demand) technology means that nothing needs to be 'out of print' any more. It doesn't mean that authors and artists, even publishers, should not be rewarded for their efforts...
Never been very happy about the post-death-of-creator copyright, however. I inherited the rights to some music written by my paternal grandfather who I never met, which actually only came out of copyright a year ago. I didn't feel happy about profiting from his labours, so gave permission whenever I was asked - mostly hymntunes, if you're interested.
The nephew of the author Agatha Christie has, on the other hand, made a very comfortable living out of administering the copyrights he inherited, don't think he's ever actually needed to work.
If you were uncomfortable with your grandfather's copyright, just wait. As long as the US government is so friendly with Disney, no copyright held by a corporation on a work created after Steamboat Willie, will ever expire.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
The advent of PDF (and indeed print-on-demand) technology means that nothing needs to be 'out of print' any more. It doesn't mean that authors and artists, even publishers, should not be rewarded for their efforts...
Never been very happy about the post-death-of-creator copyright, however. I inherited the rights to some music written by my paternal grandfather who I never met, which actually only came out of copyright a year ago. I didn't feel happy about profiting from his labours, so gave permission whenever I was asked - mostly hymntunes, if you're interested.
The nephew of the author Agatha Christie has, on the other hand, made a very comfortable living out of administering the copyrights he inherited, don't think he's ever actually needed to work.
If you were uncomfortable with your grandfather's copyright, just wait. As long as the US government is so friendly with Disney, no copyright held by a corporation on a work created after Steamboat Willie, will ever expire.
Well Disney and Time Warner.
Sorry, but the name of one of the most prominent Renaissance artists spelled that way sounds more like an unholy offspring between a fictional mexican wrestler and some sort of brasilian-themed character from the Street Fighter franchise.
So two street fighter characters?
Blanka is brazilian (and also a green-skinned beast who can electrocute enemies), and they actually have a Mexican luchador (slash cook!) called El Fuerte.
I don't mind WoTC doing what they will with regards to selling their own property.
I do not like them doing what they will with products they've already sold. I buy pdfs under the belief that I have the right to download them X times. If suddenly its X/5 times I should be refunded 4/5 of my money.
Then your problem is really with the pdf providers for deceiving you into thinking you could download it X times. They had no authority to make such promises. In fact, for pdf purchases, the ability to download it more than once is something that is not universal. Many different areas, non-RPGs, don't allow more than one download, and if you lose it, that is your own problem.
Considering the x-men/doom patrol issue, your comments intrigue, Matt. And I completely disagree with you on the credit card issue -you should have gone with something less tangible.It may not be the perfect analogy, but it is the frist thing that came to mind.
I just found it amusing that his idea of 'fighting piracy' was to basically surrender any rights to it. So why not give your credit card info out to 'fight theft'? I mean a person's credit report and lack of debt are the result of their hard work at keeping debt under control. Just like 'Rise of the Runelords' is the result of the hard work of the people who wrote/edited/produced it.
Elton wants to take advantage of others' work for no cost. He doesn't want others to take advantage of his work to stay out of debt. I see that as a double standard.
how is it a double standard?
Just because I conceive of an idea, publish it, and now it's the private property of those who buy it doesn't make my credit card number public property (I currently don't have a credit card).
Here, read this book:
Against Intellectual Monopoly by Michele Boldrin and David K. Levine.
Of course, from here on out, everything you say i'll respond with: 'You May Be Right' because your argument is a straw hat.
I can see WotC not wanting to release PDF's of their current run material (I imagine it hasn't slowed the true pirates down much, but at least the argument itself is understandable). But pulling PDFs of OOP material from previous additions? What sales were they losing to piracy on those? Even if 99% of people were pulling down pirated copies (I don't think it was, but it's a nice hyperbolic example), even the 1% remaining is pure gravy. The only true effect WotC had with the move was propping up the secondary dead tree market.
First, it doesn't matter how much they were losing to those sales - by stopping to sell them, they are now losing 100% of their sales.
Plus, pulling them doesn't help a bit against piracy. Not releasing new material as PDFs can help, because that way, the pirates have to do their own PDFs (which is totally doable, but takes longer, because instead of defeating the watermarks and other security measures, you have to get a physical copy of the book and scan that - or maybe have an insight source at the printers, the way it happened with the 4e core books). That way, the less patient will buy because it takes too long for the illegal stuff to show up. I don't know how much that would help, but there is a reasonable chance that it will help.
But once you have released something even for a short time, the PDFs exist. Then it only takes one "pirate" to get a copy, "clean" it for illegal distribution, and put it into the usual places. Once it's out, it stays out. You can't get it off the "pirate market".
And unless wizards and their hasbro overlords are exceedingly stupid, they knew that it wouldn't help against piracy.
And I don't think they wanted to help the secondary market. I guess they saw it as a way to discourage people from playing older editions. When it's too expensive to get the books, you might not want to play. And some of those who won't play older editions will surely play the current edition instead.
In the PDF case, I think they *have* reaped the whirlwind. They've lost PDF sales, they've lost consumer goodwill, they've lost another (free) method to see which classics they should 'revisit' and which won't be profitable. I just don't see theft as a justified response to their stupidity.
Let's ignore justification for a second.
Let's consider that now that the PDFs aren't available legally, the only alternative to stealing them is buying them for sometimes extraordinary prices (or not getting them at all, but that doesn't count if the goal is to get the books)
Now you can either take another mortgage on your house and hunt down a print version, or steal the book.
A lot of people don't have the money to buy overprized OOP books.
Whether that makes it right to steal them is beside the point: wizards put people into this position.
It's dickery of the highest order to take away all reasonable ways to obtain something legally and then shout THIEF when people use the only alternative available to them.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Let's ignore justification for a second.
Let's consider that now that the PDFs aren't available legally, the only alternative to stealing them is buying them for sometimes extraordinary prices (or not getting them at all, but that doesn't count if the goal is to get the books)
Now you can either take another mortgage on your house and hunt down a print version, or steal the book.
A lot of people don't have the money to buy overprized OOP books.
Whether that makes it right to steal them is beside the point: wizards put people into this position.
It's dickery of the highest order to take away all reasonable ways to obtain something legally and then shout THIEF when people use the only alternative available to them.
I'm going to disagree with you (shocking, I know). The books aren't essential to life like stealing bread is. (Yes, there can be justifications for theft. That's the 'good' part of lawful good after all). WotC, or anyone has the right to dispose of their IP as they see fit. Some people allow pretty much free access to their IP (See Ms. Robinson above) Some people don't. You don't need a copy of the Kara Tur boxed set. You might want it, but if you can't afford it, then you make due.
Likewise, I'm dealing with Bursitus in my hip. The Naproxin wasn't cutting it, so I asked the doctor to call in some pain medicine. If I couldn't afford the pain medicines, then I'd just make due. A friend I'm helping needed antibiotics. She couldn't afford the copay, I could, so I paid for the drugs.* If she'd not had me? I could understand her stealing the drugs (somehow) or money to pay for them, but she'd have to face the consequences of her actions.
*
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Elton wants to take advantage of others' work for no cost. He doesn't want others to take advantage of his work to stay out of debt. I see that as a double standard.how is it a double standard?
Just because I conceive of an idea, publish it, and now it's the private property of those who buy it doesn't make my credit card number public property (I currently don't have a credit card).
Here, read this book:
Against Intellectual Monopoly by Michele Boldrin and David K. Levine.Of course, from here on out, everything you say i'll respond with: 'You May Be Right' because your argument is a straw hat.
The 'idea' the work has limitations. You want to make others waive those limitations for your own benefit, but then get upset when it's suggested that you put your work out there for everyone to benefit from.
That you want to benefit from the work of others, without compensating them for the work, is all that needs to be said about you. That you've given up any pretense of pretending otherwise says all that needs to be said about you.
Edit: Forgot, you want others to put their work out for free, but at the same time threaten to take legal action against anyone who would use your ideas w.o credit. So... why? I mean if Intellectual Property should be freely shared, why should you care if you get credit? You want people to bide by your restrictions, but don't feel people should put their own restrictions on their IP?
Removed a post—keep it civil please.
|
I'd like to object to anyone (yes, that means I'm addressing both Kaeyoss and MM at the same time, go me for bagging a conservative Yankee and a liberal Kraut in one post) using the term "stealing" in relation to PDFs.
Stealing means you take something that is not yours and by the same act deny the victim that thing. Stealing a car means I have a car and you don't have a car (and you cannot exercise your property rights), violating IP rights means I have a PDF and you have a PDF (but you still can exercise your property rights).
I don't give a flip about what you folks understand under the term "stealing" in your mindset - most legal systems have a definition of theft and they do have a definition of IP right violation. Those are two separate things.
It's an important distinction, because RIAA/MPAA/whatever run their awareness campaigns off the notion that running a torrent client running makes you equal to a burglar. It doesn't, at least not on the criminal and legal qualification of the act (of course, unless we're talking about some legal system where warez = thievery, but I'm not aware of one).
Stealing means you take something that is not yours and by the same act deny the victim that thing.[steel] verb, stole, sto·len, steal·ing, noun
1. to take (the property of another or others) without permission or right, especially secretly or by force: A pickpocket stole his watch.
2. to appropriate (ideas, credit, words, etc.) without right or acknowledgment.
3. to take, get, or win insidiously, surreptitiously, subtly, or by chance: He stole my girlfriend.
theft via dictionary.com
[theft] –noun
1. the act of stealing; the wrongful taking and carrying away of the personal goods or property of another; larceny.
2. an instance of this.
3. Archaic . something stolen.
prop·er·ty via dictionary.com
[prop-er-tee] –noun, plural -ties.
1. that which a person owns; the possession or possessions of a particular owner: They lost all their property in the fire.
2. goods, land, etc., considered as possessions: The corporation is a means for the common ownership of property.
3. a piece of land or real estate: property on Main Street
I don't see anywhere above where stealing involves depriving someone else of that thing.
If I break into your house while you are not there and use your shower and kitchen to bath in and cook my food, I have taken something that does not belong to me (the benefits you have gained as a result of your labor) yet I have deprived you of nothing. It still qualifies as "stealing" by the definition as I have taken something that does not belong to me without permission.
Taking ideas, credit, words, etc., without right or acknowledgment, is explicitly one definition of "steal" (definition #2)