Hi Peter,
Thanks for your comments. I have a few of my own...
> First, you can distribute netepic in any format, media or method to
> ANYONE you'd like.
>
> In other words you can e-mail it, burn it to a CD and send it or
> give a print out to your friend. In that sense Netepic is totally
> community oriented and open.
That's great to hear, and is what I thought would be the case. Given
what you've said, can I suggest that you add something to the
introduction that says just that, to avoid confusion? This is as much
for your protection as for the benefit of the users - unless it's
clear that you have an open license that doesn't require explicit
authorisation for derivative works, someone could take NetEpic, throw
in some content that infringes Games Workshop's IP, but their team of
rabid lawyers might come after you! And it would take some effort to
persuade them that you're not at fault.
> > The lines in the introduction are meant to convey the following:
>
> 1. The rules uses GW trademark names without permission nor is any
> challenge meant toward them.
> 2. The actual rules manifestation of netepic is owned by netepic
> members. This means that some third party could not just take the
> rules and make profit out of them. Then again, GW would be enough to
> deter anyone thinking this since they'd purse their trademark names
> much more vigorously.
True - Games Workshop's prohibition of for-profit derivative works
will have that effect. But it wouldn't hurt to pass this stipulation
along as part of a "copyright statement".
> 3. Editable version available. Tricky one and in many cases depends
> on the current editor. Some don't care, but some have. Originally
> the files used to be in word, then we moved to PDF. Of course anyone
> is more than welcome to use a PDF converter to obtain a editable
> text.
One of the advantages of using an editable wiki or similar tool is
that other people can contribute - there's a phrase in open source
that says that "many eyes make all bugs shallow" - things like typos
and inconsistencies get fixed quicker because it's easy for the casual
reader to click the "edit" button and fix them.
> 4. I would not consider editable templates to cause "too much
> variation", since the "official" version of netepic is always
> available at the site, so others made and posted could just
> "variant" to their template and confusions avoided.
I know of some scenarios where a company has released intellectual
property under an open source/creative commons license, but with the
additional requirement that the original name not be used. This would
be like saying "feel free to take NetEpic and make your own version
that changes the points cost of the Imperator titan to be 100 points,
just don't call it NetEpic". That would seem to fit the bill.
Thanks again for your comments. I would just add one more thing: the
Creative Commons movement is very "cool" right now (for example, see
http://jodrell.net/url/45). If NetEpic was to announce that it had
adopted a creative commons license, it would be great PR for the
project and the community.
Cheers,
Gavin.
Received on Mon Mar 10 2008 - 22:48:15 UTC