Chief Technical Officer
|
We have just released the Paizo Publishing, LLC Community Use Policy, which will allow non-commercial users to create content that uses material from many Paizo products, and allows them to share that content with others.
Read the full press release here.
No, no, no.
The fansite policy is not supposed to be released until at least 9 months after the game is out. Jeez, don't you people know anything?
Seriously though, very generous allowance on use of images, product names, and the like. I'll be interested to see how this is used by the creative fanbase here.
The only thing that gives me pause is the "adult content" condition, which is a bit open to interpretation. Is mild profanity "adult content"? Where's the line?
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
The only thing that gives me pause is the "adult content" condition, which is a bit open to interpretation. Is mild profanity "adult content"? Where's the line?
You may be aware of the quote from Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart regarding pornography: it's difficult to define, but "I know it when I see it."
Well, our policy takes that same tack by passing the act of definition on to the general public:
You agree to not use this permission for material that the general public would classify as "adult content," offensive, or inappropriate for minors...
So the answer is that you shouldn't put anything in there that a court might reasonably decide is offensive or is considered adult content by the general public. ("When in doubt, take it out.")
The only thing that gives me pause is the "adult content" condition, which is a bit open to interpretation. Is mild profanity "adult content"? Where's the line?Well, our policy takes that same tack by passing the act of definition on to the general public:
You agree to not use this permission for material that the general public would classify as "adult content," offensive, or inappropriate for minors...So the answer is that you shouldn't put anything in there that a court might reasonably decide is offensive or is considered adult content by the general public. ("When in doubt, take it out.")
Porn is one thing, but what's "offensive" very much depends on the person viewing. And the "general public" is a very vague standard to use these days, in my opinion. I mean, isn't violence considered "adult content" by the general public? We're talking about killing things and taking their stuff. ;)
I think what Paizo is doing is fantastic (99.9% great), but this one term is a bit too vague for my liking from a contract point of view. Not that this would stop me from using it necessarily, but I don't like vague terms in the contracts I deal with, so I'm just sharing my thoughts.
Unfortuantely, I don't have a good suggestion as to how it could be better, but maybe it would help to put up a Q&A with examples of what would be acceptable and what would not be?
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
I think what Paizo is doing is fantastic (99.9% great), but this one term is a bit too vague for my liking from a contract point of view. Not that this would stop me from using it necessarily, but I don't like vague terms in the contracts I deal with, so I'm just sharing my thoughts.
Unfortuantely, I don't have a good suggestion as to how it could be better, but maybe it would help to put up a Q&A with examples of what would be acceptable and what would not be?
This particular bit is deliberately vague, as our lawyer agrees it should be; thus, we won't be providing examples. This clause is in place for our protection; we don't want a parent taking us to court as a party to someone exposing her youngster to something that she feels is inappropriate—especially if a judge were to agree with her.
When in doubt, leave it out.
Basically, if you think Logue or Pett would write it, don't go there...
Well, OK then....
Basically, if you think Logue or Pett would write it, don't go there...
Bdum-tsssh!
Seriously, that was exactly my thought though. Nick Logue, as brilliant as he is, has written some pretty raw stuff at times for Pathfinder. Is it to be taken as implied that he may represent the upper limit of acceptible violent content?
I think it's there more along the lines for say
Person 1 ; "My son is mentally scared after reading that trash in that product, about humans eating babys I am gonna sue!
Paizo ; we are sorry , however that was not are product , and It clearly states we have standards in are content agreement if you feel like it was over step then You need to contact them.
I may be off but thats how it reads to me, Not a lawyer or anything..so take it for what it is
|
Director of Brand Strategy
|
We have just released the Paizo Publishing, LLC Community Use Policy, which will allow non-commercial users to create content that uses material from many Paizo products, and allows them to share that content with others.
Read the full press release here.
Thanks Vic! This is more generous than even I expected!
One question, though...why is D0, Hollow's Last Hope not among the products in either section 1 or section 2?
|
Basically, if you think Logue or Pett would write it, don't go there...Bdum-tsssh!
Seriously, that was exactly my thought though. Nick Logue, as brilliant as he is, has written some pretty raw stuff at times for Pathfinder. Is it to be taken as implied that he may represent the upper limit of acceptible violent content?
I'd cautiously take Nick Logue's work as a good estimate of the upper limit in how far one could reasonably go without going violating the license. That's plenty of leeway though. It's understandable Paizo wouldn't want the Pathfinder name attatched to anything too extreme.
Great stuff. I appreciate its permissiveness, its tone, and its timing. As self appointed chief gadfly of the whole GSL thing, I feel obliged to analyze the Pathfinder Compatibility License (PCL) and Paizo Community Use Policy (PCUP) at some length.
Paizo’s New Pathfinder License and Fansite Policy Examined
The short form, concentrating on my questions on it/issues with it (it's all great work and much appreciated, but it's late and bedtime approaches, so I just want to spit out the limited areas where I think maybe work could be done on 'em), are:
The PCL: Awesome. Only one thought, the termination clause is kinda unclear about what happens when "the license ends" a la the d20 STL cancellation. As written, that would mean an immmediate no sell/destruction order which I am sure not what was intended. I'd recommend reviewing that and putting in some specific verbiage to cover that case. Also, think about the GSL's "six month selloff if you decide to quit the license," I don't see anything in this one about licensees voluntarily terminating. Anyway, dotting that i and crossing that t would give other companies more of a warm fuzzy when uptaking the license.
The PCUP: The first two paragraphs are particularly brilliant. In general very good. I have an issue with two things.
1. The "positive" clause - it seems like an effort to shield yourselves from criticism; it's unnecessary and defensive. Recommend removal. If people decide to post all day about your stuff being crap they can hide behind fair use anyway. And your supporters (including me) don't want to feel like we can't ever say anything negative about the rare bad product or whatever.
2. The "adult content" clause. Y'all called BS on Wizards because of their morals clause in the GSL, isn't this the same thing? Now, I understand what you're trying to do, but I have some suggestions on how to better accomplish it. Remember you have a lot of "adult" content in those adventures already, and there's popular stuff on the boards (like Lilith's nudie pics of whatsername from RotR) that already come up in this context. Your customer base is more adults than kids, and frankly we want to do whatever R rated stuff comes to our minds. And this is pretty vague, there's a long distance between 'obscene' and 'not suitable for minors.'
How about instead of "no adult content," you instead require that adult content be appropriately screened from minors using whatever means the law and Internet best practices require? For example, Lilith's nudie pictures are behind the "18+" age verification of whatever fantasy art site that is they're on. If someone wants to write "Golarion slashfic," fine, as long as again they have it appropriately marked as adult content. You're covered, no censorship, and it works "like the Internet always works."
And now my swinging for the bleachers comment - what about letting people publish in Golarion? Adventures using your PI, for example?
Now, hear me out. Traveller has done exactly this in a clever way. They are OGL, they have a logo/license policy and a community/fansite policy - and one extra one, the "Foreven Free Sector" license, which lets people publish in the Imperium setting, within a "sandbox" of a specific sector of space. (See my blog post for links). Anyway, you could set aside some region and let other folks publish stuff there. Would it do anything but help your cause to have, for example, a Necromancer or Green Ronin adventure set in Golarion? I don't think so personally! And by using that sandbox method, you can mitigate the effects of any quality problems in those third party items.
Anyway, I think it's worth considering...
Thanks and good night! And great work. Y'all kicked their asses again.
The issues with ending the license seemed, to me, to be covered under Section 8 after "If we terminate the License for any reason other than breach,..." Unless a license with a company could be ended without terminating it or something.
And now my swinging for the bleachers comment - what about letting people publish in Golarion? Adventures using your PI, for example?
Actually the PCUP lets you do just that, as long as you don't charge anything for it. If you want to charge, you'll need to acquire an individual license, according to the FAQs.
2. The "adult content" clause. Y'all called BS on Wizards because of their morals clause in the GSL, isn't this the same thing?
I think that an important difference is that using the GSL is, for the most part, required to work with 4th edition and that the Paizo's license is not required to use the rules in the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, it just allows one to indicate compatibility with the system.
|
The Community Use Policy looks great! Now I can finally get my fansite project on the road.
One question, though. The policy states that we may use text or artwork posted in the Paizo blog, excluding certain items such as photos. Does this mean that we modify this artwork to include in banners, logos, and other forms of graphics we produce for our site? Or does it mean that we can use the artwork as-is and that we may not alter it?
2. The "adult content" clause. Y'all called BS on Wizards because of their morals clause in the GSL, isn't this the same thing?I think that an important difference is that using the GSL is, for the most part, required to work with 4th edition and that the Paizo's license is not required to use the rules in the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, it just allows one to indicate compatibility with the system.
Let me step off the official soap box to throw out my take on this. This is pretty much the "Don't Be A Crass Jerk" clause. If you want to use the Compatibility License or Community Use Policy to do 95% of what it's intended for (talking about and developing RPG stuff for Paizo's worlds) fantastic! I'm as anti-censorship as anyone, but if something crops up that becomes so pervasive that it starts to alter the perception of our publishing operation (like Nick's inevitable "Scab Brothel of the Ogre Nympho" Mega Adventure Path, for example), we need to retain some ability to influence how our livelihoods are represented. Does this sound like an extreme case? Well yeah, it should. As it turns out, we're not going to have a horde of legal watchdogs or stamp-wielding censors patrolling the interwebs to make sure everything folks write could appear in a Disney movie - we don't want that. In fact, the whole concept of "adult content" in these terms is colored by the fact that it applies to a game fundamentally about slaughtering creatures and stealing their stuff. Pretty much, do whatever you want in your home games, side projects, etc, but for things you're going to purposefully attach Paizo's (relatively) good name to, try to be more careful.
Hum. Sounds a little like one of those "This is Our 'Ool" signs...
|
Creative Director
|
One way to look at it is this:
If you want to do edgy material that pushes the boundary, your best bet is to build your own game that doesn't build off of another company's work.
The main point is this; that clause is in there to protect Paizo. If someone makes a product that is in bad taste or something like that, we don't want the actions of one bad apple to reflect poorly on us. If someone were to, say, produce a "Complete Guide to Lynching Minorities" or something equally or even more tasteless, we don't want our subscribers to see those products, see the Pathfinder logo associated with it, and assume that we condone lynchings. That doesn't help us, and it doesn't help the community.
Remember: If you're using Pathfinder material, you're as much a part of the shared Pathfinder experience as the rest of us. We're all in the same pool. We don't want anyone peeing in that pool or dragging in a dead horse to contaminate the water, and we don't want the guests who come to swim in the pool to think that we enjoy swimming in tainted water and think that they should enjoy it too.
Anyway, in the end, what it boils down to is this: If the thought of asking the general public if you can do something is embarrassing or shameful to you, or if the thought of your mom and dad seeing what you're creating frightens you, that's a pretty good indicator that you shouldn't try to do it.
|
Creative Director
|
The Community Use Policy looks great! Now I can finally get my fansite project on the road.
One question, though. The policy states that we may use text or artwork posted in the Paizo blog, excluding certain items such as photos. Does this mean that we modify this artwork to include in banners, logos, and other forms of graphics we produce for our site? Or does it mean that we can use the artwork as-is and that we may not alter it?
It means you can only use the artwork as-is. You can resize it, but only if you keep the aspect ratio; no resizing it only vertically to cram the artwork into a narrow spot, for example. No photoshopping your friend's face onto Seoni. No adding additional flourishes to the Sihedron Sigil. No taking a map we've posted to a blog and adding in additional furniture.
|
Creative Director
|
2. The "adult content" clause. Y'all called BS on Wizards because of their morals clause in the GSL, isn't this the same thing?I think that an important difference is that using the GSL is, for the most part, required to work with 4th edition and that the Paizo's license is not required to use the rules in the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, it just allows one to indicate compatibility with the system.
Correct. If you want to use the Pathfinder RPG rules to create something that we wouldn't want associated with Golarion, you can just do so using the OGL and SRD (or their Pathfinder Equivalent incarnations, once those are finished come August or thereabouts). You just wouludn't be able to use the Pathfinder Compatible logo, or set it in Golarion, or use any of our art. Neither of the two licenses we just released are what you'd be looking for.
And again... if you're in doubt... shoot us an email. We read and reply. We do!
|
|
We have just released the Paizo Publishing, LLC Community Use Policy, which will allow non-commercial users to create content that uses material from many Paizo products, and allows them to share that content with others.
Read the full press release here.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
Thanks for the feedback, Ernest!
The PCL: Awesome. Only one thought, the termination clause is kinda unclear about what happens when "the license ends" a la the d20 STL cancellation.
See Section 8; it's the paragraph that begins with "If we terminate the License for any reason other than breach, you may no longer make any new products using the Compatibility Logo, but you may continue to sell existing physical products that were compliant under this License as long as you have inventory."
The PCUP: The first two paragraphs are particularly brilliant. In general very good. I have an issue with two things.
1. The "positive" clause - it seems like an effort to shield yourselves from criticism; it's unnecessary and defensive. Recommend removal. If people decide to post all day about your stuff being crap they can hide behind fair use anyway. And your supporters (including me) don't want to feel like we can't ever say anything negative about the rare bad product or whatever.
The exact wording here is "You agree to present Paizo, our products, and the Paizo Material in a generally positive light." "Generally" is the key here. If you want to call us out on mistakes, or post less-than-shining reviews, that's all fine, so long as the general tone is positive. This clause is here so that people who want to create "I hate Paizo" sites can't use our materials to do so (or list them in our registry).
How about instead of "no adult content," you instead require that adult content be appropriately screened from minors using whatever means the law and Internet best practices require?
Two problems with that—first, we want material you create to be freely accessible by anyone, not just adults; secondly, it's just not worth the legal risk to us if you get it wrong.
What about letting people publish in Golarion?
Non-commercial users can do that under the Community Use Policy, so I assume you're asking us to allow professional publishers to do that. As we point out in the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Compatibility License FAQ, while this generally available license doesn't allow it, we will give consideration to requests for separate licenses to do that. But, as we say there, "you'll need to have a very, very good plan that presents exceptionally unique and interesting product ideas."
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
Ok, as far as adult content goes, I suppose the most important question is are you allowed to show bare breasts if you're doing a web comic?
;)
Sam
Do you think that you're doing it in a way that the general public would classify it as "adult content," offensive, or inappropriate for minors?
|
|
It means you can only use the artwork as-is. You can resize it, but only if you keep the aspect ratio; no resizing it only vertically to cram the artwork into a narrow spot, for example. No photoshopping your friend's face onto Seoni. No adding additional flourishes to the Sihedron Sigil. No taking a map we've posted to a blog and adding in additional furniture.
That's what I thought, thanks for confirming. :)
No taking a map we've posted to a blog and adding in additional furniture.
I'm not sure I fully understand what you mean by "furniture" here (language barrier), so what about the following examples:
1 - cropping a map in order to show only a part of it (say, only Avistan instead of the whole Avistan/Garund map);
2 - adding a "point of interest" to a map (e.g., to indicate the location of a hidden temple to Lamashtu used in a fan-made adventure).
3 - delimiting an area on the map by circling it, or by darkening the rest of the map so that the area would stand out (e.g., to indicate where the Skoan-Quah Shoantis live)
Are all those prohibited by the Community Use Policy?
Why are you all awake!To get work done ;-)
I was too slow deleting the post. :)
It means you can only use the artwork as-is. You can resize it, but only if you keep the aspect ratio; no resizing it only vertically to cram the artwork into a narrow spot, for example. No photoshopping your friend's face onto Seoni. No adding additional flourishes to the Sihedron Sigil. No taking a map we've posted to a blog and adding in additional furniture.
Hm... that part and the part about only using art from the blog (I hoped you'd have a art gallery or database one day) means that I'll have to take most, if not all, of my wallpapers offline, right?
|
S
e
o
n
i
It means you can only use the artwork as-is. You can resize it, but only if you keep the aspect ratio; no resizing it only vertically to cram the artwork into a narrow spot, for example. No photoshopping your friend's face onto Seoni. No adding additional flourishes to the Sihedron Sigil. No taking a map we've posted to a blog and adding in additional furniture.Hm... that part and the part about only using art from the blog (I hoped you'd have a art gallery or database one day) means that I'll have to take most, if not all, of my wallpapers offline, right?
Oh.... KaeYoss you can contact paizos license manager :)
By the way, I may need your services soon.
|
Do you think that you're doing it in a way that the general public would classify it as "adult content," offensive, or inappropriate for minors?Ok, as far as adult content goes, I suppose the most important question is are you allowed to show bare breasts if you're doing a web comic?
;)
Sam
Well, if I'm not then I really must be doing it wrong!
:D
Err... Did I really slide in under the humor detectors with that one? Sometimes my humor tends to be a little too dry.
Sam
Looks good.
I didn't see anything at EnWorld's news page on this, so I sent russ an email with the links.
I like virtually everything about this, with the single exception of the "positive" clause. It seems like something that will inevitably cause controversy when enforced.
It means you can only use the artwork as-is. You can resize it, but only if you keep the aspect ratio; no resizing it only vertically to cram the artwork into a narrow spot, for example. No photoshopping your friend's face onto Seoni. No adding additional flourishes to the Sihedron Sigil. No taking a map we've posted to a blog and adding in additional furniture.Hm... that part and the part about only using art from the blog (I hoped you'd have a art gallery or database one day) means that I'll have to take most, if not all, of my wallpapers offline, right?
Board ate my post...
So, I can't crop an image to make a top banner to separate PF stuff in my website like this http://www.veudaverdade.com/index2.htm (that image is originaly a far larger scene. Text was also added.)
EDIT: Actually seems like only logos, icons and covers can't be cropped, etc. So I guess I could make a banner with whats in the community pack... right? :P
The issues with ending the license seemed, to me, to be covered under Section 8 after "If we terminate the License for any reason other than breach,..." Unless a license with a company could be ended without terminating it or something.
I think you're right. Put another one in the win column.
Do you think that you're doing it in a way that the general public would classify it as "adult content," offensive, or inappropriate for minors?Ok, as far as adult content goes, I suppose the most important question is are you allowed to show bare breasts if you're doing a web comic?
;)
Sam
That's just about an impossible question to answer, which is why this clause really does need more refining. Who's the general public? I think the general U.S. sentiment is that "titties are not for kids" except in limited context (National Geographic, fine art).
Ok, as far as adult content goes, I suppose the most important question is are you allowed to show bare breasts if you're doing a web comic?
Absolutely!*
*As long as those breasts belong to men.
Thanks for the feedback, Ernest!
The PCL: Awesome. Only one thought, the termination clause is kinda unclear about what happens when "the license ends" a la the d20 STL cancellation.See Section 8; it's the paragraph that begins with "If we terminate the License for any reason other than breach, you may no longer make any new products using the Compatibility Logo, but you may continue to sell existing physical products that were compliant under this License as long as you have inventory."
The PCUP: The first two paragraphs are particularly brilliant. In general very good. I have an issue with two things.
1. The "positive" clause - it seems like an effort to shield yourselves from criticism; it's unnecessary and defensive. Recommend removal. If people decide to post all day about your stuff being crap they can hide behind fair use anyway. And your supporters (including me) don't want to feel like we can't ever say anything negative about the rare bad product or whatever.
The exact wording here is "You agree to present Paizo, our products, and the Paizo Material in a generally positive light." "Generally" is the key here. If you want to call us out on mistakes, or post less-than-shining reviews, that's all fine, so long as the general tone is positive. This clause is here so that people who want to create "I hate Paizo" sites can't use our materials to do so (or list them in our registry).
How about instead of "no adult content," you instead require that adult content be appropriately screened from minors using whatever means the law and Internet best practices require?Two problems with that—first, we want material you create to be freely accessible by anyone, not just adults; secondly, it's just not worth the legal risk to us if you get it wrong.
What about letting people publish in Golarion?Non-commercial users can do that under the Community...
Cool. I see now that Section 8 does cover my PCL concern. So that one's all happy. The PCL is officially perfect :-)
I understand your point on the "positive" thing - I still think it's unnecessary, as anyone with a Paizo hate site will claim the fair use "review" harbor. It would keep you from linking to them, thought, I guess, so I label this as "ok" and not worth haggling over.
The adult content thing - this still isn't all that acceptable and I really think y'all need to be open to revisiting how to achieve your goal in a different way. You have differentiated yourselves from the other companies in being willing to have an adult approach to adventuring. Your fanbase appreciates this and wants to explore gaming that *isn't* for every ten year old (God forbid). This will significantly impact that, and IMO that's a bad business decision as it works against your core.
Your two responses here are pretty weak (no offense) - "We want the content to be freely accessible by everyone" and "legal risk." First, the content is still free, you're just not letting minors at adult content. "Every fan thing should be usable by everyone" is not a worthwhile enough goal in the face of the problems this clause creates. And I fail to see where the legal risk is; the point of the license is to say "And all the legal risk is yours here, peace out." Unless instead of legal risk you really mean "cranks saying you're degenerates on cable access tv." You've already said don't to anything illegal, and offering truly pornographic materials etc. without age verification is illegal. What this does is just confuse everyone. How "non-adult"? In my opinion there's a lot of stuff that's on Basic Cable that's adult. If you really mean only not extreme stuff, this needs to be significantly reworded, because I can see a lot of very community desirable use cases of at least the basic cable and HBO drama level of language/sex/violence/adult themes.
And just as an aside - after claiming the GSL morals clause is a dealbreaker, a lot of the gaming community is gonna drag this clause up and down ENWorld etc. and say "just the same!" I think this'll be a bit of a rep hit.
Anyway. On the Golarion thing; I think most people (I know I do) see the "it has to be original and super duper" statement and think "never mind..." Why not let people publish 3p adventures in the world? I mean, every adventure author hopes an adventure is somewhat original, but y'all state it pretty strongly.
Green Ronin did this with Freeport - I liked the Atlas Games Freeport adventure, they let someone else do some (forget the company off the top of my head...) And all it does is make their property and sourcebooks way more desirable. (You can always declare them as "non-canonical" or whatnot, no one would expect the official world to care what happens in them.) I can understand wanting to handle it through one-off licensing, but I guess to me "you'll need to have a very, very good plan that presents exceptionally unique and interesting product ideas" means "buzz off unless it's some totally new thing like a Golarion boardgame."
SO anyway, my only real substantive complaint is the adult content clause. And I know "the lawyer said that" but I've dealt with lawyers, and if you tell them "But you see, it's important to my business to allow X, figure out how to make it happen safely" they will.
Oh, was mulling this over in the shower and had a thought that might help you. Reading between the lines, some of your concerns weren't "Golarion slashfic" but "linked to from our site with our logo on it." Here's an idea that might help achieve your goals.
The current fansite policy totally combines using the logo, linking from your site, and "can I have a site that talks about Paizo IP." This made me think of the White Wolf fansite guidelines (http://www.white-wolf.com/fansites/fs_guidelines.php). Now, in general I try not to think about them because there's a number of "wrong way to write fansite guidelines" examples in there, but it does do a couple things of note.
1. No morals clause. Apparently they feel legally covered anyway. Just saying, they're bigger and if anyone has reason to be concerned about blowback it's them.
2. They separate the fansite guidelines into two parts - "all sites" and "if you want to use the Dark Pack logo and get linked from the site." You could do the same thing if the link/logo was what concerned you. All sites - most of the clauses apply. Then, if I can't talk you out of dropping that morals clause, at least you could refactor to say "and to use the logo and get the link, you have to be positive and non-adult and - really, at our discretion." It's a lot less threatening for y'all to say "Hey, we reserve the right not to link to you and have you not use the logo for whatever reason" than "You can and should not have a site with this stuff on it."
There's some other nice small things to crib from there, like apparently there's interest in modifying the default images more - they state it like "You may use these icons as is, or adjust them for color, texture and size to meet your needs. You may not change the basic shape or proportions of those icons. Keep in mind that just because you move the art around or change a few things about it, it doesn't suddenly become your art. It's still ours."
Anyway, not to go on at length, just trying to be constructive and show some ways that maybe you and the "grown ups" in the community can both reach your goals.
My gaming group runs a lot of Pathfinder, and I post session summaries on my blog. Some games, depending on the PCs, get to the point where I wouldn't want *my* ten year old reading them (well, she's six, but I can project outwards), but frankly I don't think as a fansite I need to worry about that past posting a "hey this one's probably for adults only" on it. We use dirty words and our cleric of Calistria sure banged her way through some Shoanti (well, the whole party did, but I like blaming her.)...
Also, as this is a legal license, we have to put the "But I trust Vic and Erik" aside somewhat. I saw Erik run afoul of RPGA morals clauses and am pretty sure the way he'd interpret this clause would be safe enough. But at any given point in time, who's making the call? Probably not him. Some of the time you. Or your designated intern. Or once you move up/on/whatnot, someone else. People have wildly different attitudes about what is "adult content" and leaving too wide an undefined band creates a chilling effect. "Do I have to be worried about these PF session summaries? I don't have to be worried about my Savage Worlds session summaries." Those are thoughts you don't want people to be having.
|
|
We have just released the Paizo Publishing, LLC Community Use Policy, which will allow non-commercial users to create content that uses material from many Paizo products, and allows them to share that content with others.
Read the full press release here.
thanks
quite complete and interesting :)now we are legal :D
"titties are not for kids"
Even the bearded ones?
Absolutely!**As long as those breasts belong to men.
That's sexist!
I'm going to comment on the mature/adult content line, specifically this one:
You agree to not use this permission for material that the general public would classify as "adult content," offensive, or inappropriate for minors, and you agree that such use would irreparably harm Paizo.
Now, taking a similar statement from DeviantArt:
When we discuss mature content we are specifically referring to deviations which contain images, subject matter, or other themes which some viewers may find offensive, distasteful, or otherwise undesirable to view or to read. The most common ‘undesired’ viewing material may include, but is not limited to, images containing artistic nudity (see details below), large amounts of simulated blood and gore, or generally violent themes.
DeviantART strictly prohibits the submission of materials classified as pornographic or obscene. There is no exception to this prohibition.
Certain content may be deemed obscene by the administration and as such the staff reserves the right to remove such content immediately upon discovery. The administration reserves the sole right to review and classify questionable material as obscene or not obscene.
By DeviantArt's rules, I can't use their site to display explicit sexual imagery (figures engaged in anything that is deemed a sexual act). Nudity, violent images and gore are required to be blocked by a maturity filter. (How many people actually follow this on dA is another topic entirely, and one that should be discussed on their site. ;) )
By the rules of the CUP, it states that anything that could be considered "adult content" can't be used in conjunction with the CUP. In this particular instance, it's my opinion that "adult content" is classified as in Deviant's interpretation - materials classified as pornographic and obscene. What is pornographic and obscene is of course, subjective, but avoiding explicit imagery (written or otherwise) of sex and violence is probably a good rule to follow. Anything beyond that should probably stay in the realm of fan works, and not associated with the CUP in any fashion. They've been mentioned before, but "Hook Mountain Massacre" and "Crown of the Kobold King" should be at the upper limit of what would be acceptable (sex/violence, and violence towards children, respectively).
IMHO, IANAL, etc. *gets off soapbox*
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
Why not let people publish 3p adventures in the world?
Again, we haven't said we won't allow that; we've just said we won't allow professional publishers to do it under a general license. We'll look over each option we're presented, and if it makes sense for us, we'll do it. In fact, we've already let Kobold Quarterly publish some original Pathfinder content.
SO anyway, my only real substantive complaint is the adult content clause. And I know "the lawyer said that" but I've dealt with lawyers, and if you tell them "But you see, it's important to my business to allow X, figure out how to make it happen safely" they will.
It honestly *isn't* important to our business to have anybody publish anything with direct connections to our product lines that the general public would consider adult content.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
There's been some crosstalk in this thread where some questions are about the Community Use Policy and some questions are about the Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License. I think this is leading to confusion.
Folks, please keep this thread focused on the Community Use Policy, and talk about the Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License over here.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
Question: if I have a web site for hosting my campaigns and only my players have access (free access) do I need to register as a Community Use site? I would love to use a lot of the material in the Package...
thanks!
Yes, to benefit from the package, you are required to add an entry describing your material on our Community Use Registry. You can mention the restriction in the description.
|
|
Sounds very fair-minded to me. Paizo has to have a CYA clause, but doesn't want to stunt the imaginations of the fans. Good on ya!
Question: How does this apply to fan art? I do a little 1-page-per-session comic for my group's Second Darkness campaign and I post it to the Paizo forums and a couple of other web forums. Do I need to include that on each page? That could take up a lot of illo space! :)