PDA

View Full Version : Question Regarding Ownership



gspRooster
01-30-2014, 10:48 AM
It is my assumption that anything we do that is collaboratively decided belongs to the group collectively. What of the things we do independently without input from the others?

I'm asking because I like the two civilizations I've created so far and would like to incorporate them into my own personal project.

Azelor
01-30-2014, 12:04 PM
I'm not sure I understand you question. You want to incorporate these two civs into your personal project and in the CWBP ?

Anyway, it's good to have a template and to work on some ideas but avoid getting into details since the world has not been decided yet.

Falconius
01-30-2014, 12:58 PM
Hehe, I understand your feelings.

I'd say that everything being done for the finished maps and worldbuilding modules fall under a creative commons Attribution Non-Commercial Share Alike (CC BY-NC-SA) license. Meaning that if you really like your things and you want full use of them for your own stuff and to own them completely you should withdraw them and keep them for your own projects. The reason being that it would limit what you could do with your own worlds, as these portions of it would fall under that license. If however you intend your own world to also fall under that license there is no conflict and you could use it in both projects. I recommend against this however, my feeling is that you should try to have things for this project separate from things for your own just to keep things simple and to avoid frustration farther down the line.

Azelor
01-30-2014, 11:30 PM
Falconius, the only problem with the licence BY-NC-SA is that he could not sell a product made with that content (NC).

I think that using the same content could create some logical problems, it might not be in harmony with the rest of the world unless it's a modified version.

Jalyha
01-30-2014, 11:35 PM
Wouldn't that prevent, say... if you developed a game or wrote a book based on your own personal world... and one of the civilizations your world started with was one from the project... you wouldn't be able to market your work, right? :?

Falconius
01-31-2014, 03:24 AM
Falconius, the only problem with the licence BY-NC-SA is that he could not sell a product made with that content (NC).

I think that using the same content could create some logical problems, it might not be in harmony with the rest of the world unless it's a modified version.Also that it would be open to be shared. I just think it is better for the project and the people contributing to keep things separate to avoid any unforeseen disharmony. I'm also not sure what is the best license for us to operate under, but the BY NC SA one looked like it would fit our needs best. So if anyone has better suggestions I'm all for it.

Redrobes
01-31-2014, 05:57 AM
The original CWBP was CC with BY-SA-NC that meant that any map that used another one in the CWBP as a basis - as in the main world map - would fall under the CC license and therefore you cannot then use it commercially. You can mark out an area of the main map, ask the forum mods to reserve that area and then make your entirely own commercial product which notionally sits there but it should not use any of the original CC licensed material. Also, its possible that the mods to the CWBP might not like that kind of arrangement. But thats up to the consensus of the people who are doing it. But generally if you use CC licensing for the CWBP (and I was very much for this idea in first CWBP) then thats the way it is - non commercial. Basically whats being asked is whether one can sell other peoples work which was submitted under the understanding (and legal license) that it would not be. So no.

Let me clarify that post two above by Jalyha. If you used ALL your own material then you own all the copyright to it. If you use some of the work previously submitted by other people (which includes the shape of the main world map) then its not ALL your own work any more. So if your map has to fit in with the rivers, mountains and other shapes within the CWBP framework then it using parts of the map which are not yours to sell commercially.

Jalyha
01-31-2014, 09:55 AM
I see. So... if I had a con-race that I've already created/used in my unfinished stories, and I posted/let them put it in the CWBP, I could still publish my books with that race in it.

BUT if I incorporated the land/cities they live in *IN* the CWBP, or developments made to the race by other members here, then I could not use that. Right? :)

Redrobes
01-31-2014, 10:18 AM
Yes that would be the case. You should still be somewhat careful tho. People should have the expectation that if they are doing a community world building project then the expectation is that at the end they could share everything. If someone else took your race and did some work on it and then released it with some maps and bundled it all up as CC BY-SA-NC then the next person would reasonably think that everything in that package was CC. So I think if you are going to let people use your work you should release it as CC for the project. Since your the original owner of the first entity then you can release your own work in many ways. You can use it yourself commercially and also release it as CC. Tho once released as CC you cannot stop people from using the CC version as per the CC rules. So tho non commercial, they could still share it.

What CC is a license that says in effect, tho I own the copyright to the work as I am the original author of it, I am licensing it for the following uses (sharing etc) on condition that it is shared in with the same rights as the original CC (share alike) and that you cannot profit commercially from it. Your work can be licensed as many times in as many different ways as you want so long as its yours to license. The point of the CC is that once marked (and assuming that its validly marked) then it gives people the right to use it in that manner without them having to ask you if they can use it in that manner. Once its out there marked as CC tho and people pick it up like that you cant then retroactively say later - hey my book is doing well but I cant get a publishing deal now cos the publishers want no shared licenses of this work out there so ill take my CC rights back.

But it also means that the CWBP project cannot be copied to another site / forum / company etc and sold for profit legally. There has been numerous, countless examples where public domain material has been hijacked. Just look at the wealth of pictures of 18th century paintings that are copyright because the painting is not copyright but the photo of it that you get to see is and nobody gets to see the original any more. Copyright is clearly written so that if you take a photo of public domain work and you publish that photo then it should be possible to take that photo and republish it. But thats not how the law is interpreted due to extreme corruption. So public domain is worthless now hence CC started so that the rights are still owned but that the automatic grant of use is given with restrictions.

Azelor
01-31-2014, 10:29 AM
Sorry, I just want to make it very clear: It mean that I can use the content elsewhere for commercial purpose as long as I am the creator of that content?

Redrobes
01-31-2014, 10:34 AM
Thats right.

So long as you are the creator of *all* of the work. But you cant derive a map based off of another in the CWBP and still claim that the map is *all* yours any more. Derivative maps of a CC-SA basis must also be CC-SA thats the point of "Share Alike". But if its all yours then you can do what the hell you like with it.

Redrobes
01-31-2014, 10:46 AM
But can I add that like Falconius says - I agree that I dont think non CC work should filter into the CWBP so as to make only part of it shareable. If you make your own stuff then share it to the CWBP as CC you can still sell it yourself as well but don't claim that bits you add to the CWBP are not CC licensed.

We had Gamerprinter who you may know well being a popular poster made a set of oriental styled maps called Kaiden which he wanted to be on an island off to the West of Ansium. I thought this was fine but he should not use the island thats there as part of the main map as a Kaiden map template. We just said to people dont map in that bit and assume that you can run Kaiden adventures there. But we didn't have modules of Kaiden appearing as part of the CWBP. I am not sure what became of it but it was useful to split that out and away from the CWBP else there would be problems.

You just cant end up with a situation where everybody pools into the project and one person monetizes it for himself so CC guarantees that it remains free and shareable for everyone.

Gamerprinter
01-31-2014, 11:22 AM
Actually, I had to make this decision at one time as well. When the CWBP first came into existence, I was eager to join. So first I created the Qashya Mal region which consisted of 4 squares - if I remember right. I mapped them all myself. Then I opted to create some textual content for the area. I don't know if it has been further developed, but I spent several months fleshing out the region.

Then I got the urge to work on another area, something I could assign as "this is the Japan analog", since I've been wanting to develop a fictional Japan land as a personal project for a while. My initial problem was I couldn't find a set of islands that best match what I wanted to create. I did pick/get assigned a particular chain of islands, and before I started to map, I started to write some of the intended content for such an area... but I stopped. You see I came to the conclusion that I wanted to develop something completely on my own, then publish it. The more I thought about it, the more I didn't want to steal something from this (an existing community project) and claim it as my own.

Part of it was because the island chain the I settled on really didn't satisfy my needs for a specific size of island - not too big, but big enough. Also because I really wanted to publish my own thing.

I started to more deeply design a setting, as well as generate the first of several very Japanese style island maps. Once I had something to show, I started contacting several publishers that I've done commission work in the past who might be interested in publishing a setting I was working on. Eventually I found Steven Russell of Rite Publishing who talked me into self-publishing as an imprint under Rite Publishing. This way I could maintain control of the product, but I could get help for game designers and writers to help bring my personal project into published reality.

Thus I have now published the Kaidan setting of Japanese horror (PFRPG), so far I've created with the help of Jonathan McAnulty an introductory trilogy of modules to Kaidan called The Curse of the Golden Spear with 3 modules: The Gift (http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product/91465/Dim-Spirit-Curse-of-the-Golden-Spear-Part-2-%28PFRPG%29?cPath=4448_6626), Dim Spirit (http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product/91465/Dim-Spirit-Curse-of-the-Golden-Spear-Part-2-%28PFRPG%29?cPath=4448_6626) and Dark Path (http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product/92499/Dark-Path-Curse-of-the-Golden-Spear-Part-3-%28PFRPG%29?cPath=4448_6626), also 3 one-shot adventures were created: Frozen Wind (http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product/95894/Frozen-Wind-%28PFRPG%29?cPath=4448_6626) (a free module), The Tolling of Tears (http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product/109785/The-Tolling-of-Tears-%28PFRPG%29?cPath=4448_6626), and Up from Darkness (http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product/107645/Up-From-Darkness-%28PFRPG%29?cPath=4448_6626). Also 3 racial supplements were created: In the Company of Kappa (http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product/88682/In-The-Company-of-Kappa--A-1st-20th-level-Player-Character-Racial-Class-%28PFRPG%29?cPath=4448_6626), In the Company of Henge (http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product/94500/In-The-Company-of-Henge--A-1st-20th-level-Player-Character-Racial-Class-%28PFRPG%29?cPath=4448_6626) and In the Company of Tengu (http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product/92508/In-The-Company-of-Tengu--A-1st-20th-level-Player-Character-Racial-Class-%28PFRPG%29?cPath=4448_6626). 2 (so far) class/faction supplements have been created: Way of the Yakuza (http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product/96752/Way-of-the-Yakuza-%28PFRPG%29?cPath=4448_6626) and Way of the Samurai (http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product/102482/Way-of-the-Samurai-%28PFRPG%29), as well as a haunts guide (written by T. H. Gulliver) called #30 Haunts for Kaidan (http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product/98413/%2330-Haunts-for-Kaidan-%28PFRPG%29). Finally I completely designed/developed/written/page layout and created the cartography for Haiku of Horror: Autumn Moon Bath House (http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product/113378/Haiku-of-Horror-Autumn-Moon-Bath-House) - an adventure site and mini-module.

2 summers ago, I ran a successful Kickstarter to fund a GMs and Players Campaign Guide to the setting, and though past the scheduled release date, we are wrapping up the last of the magic system, before it goes to editing, then back to me for page layout. So we should those products in the next several months.

So at the end of this diatribe - I ran into wanting to publish something from the CWBP, and my final decision was to completely separate the two projects and not actually develop my area from the CWBP. So needless to say, I took an idea, and ran with it in a big way!

You might opt to go a different way, but if you think you might want to publish something on your own, I suggest you don't pull it from here, rather go completely your own way - from scratch.

12rounds
02-01-2014, 04:43 AM
Personally I've evolved into supporting free culture licensing only. Essentially having a CC-SA/CC-BY-SA (dropping out the NC) license is giving you a free culture license. There's no real reason to force the NC part in - it's just asking for trouble. Having a world is fine and dandy but if the individual licensing of maps/whatnot prohibits it's commercialization in the future, it's a damn sure thing CWBP will never evolve into an actual gaming product but remains a niche side project of hobbyists and professionals of the gaming industry.

12rounds
02-01-2014, 04:52 AM
Personally I've evolved into supporting free culture licensing only. Essentially having a CC-SA/CC-BY-SA (dropping out the NC) license is giving you a free culture license. There's no real reason to force the NC part in - it's just asking for trouble. Having a world is fine and dandy but if the individual licensing of maps/whatnot prohibits it's commercialization in the future, it's a damn sure thing CWBP will never evolve into an actual gaming product but remains a niche side project of hobbyists and professionals of the gaming industry.

Jalyha
02-01-2014, 09:45 AM
Okay, I get it.. it's like...

I create a race of people ... the AEJMANS or something (yay for keyboard-smash naming) and a city for them to live in. Hollywood. I describe Hollywood very clearly.. it's a city in a cave, lots of tunnels, etc.

I say hey, lets use them in the CWBP. Then someone maps another city with AEJMANS in it, in a cave with tunnels, and they say hey, these guys get water by... idk a huge osmosis temple in the city center... w/e.

So I put a temple in Hollywood.

Any of us can use AEJMANS in any way that we *do not* make money... like private games, or maps on the site or whatever.

I can sell a book or a game that has AEJMANS in it and Hollywood - but the temple isn't mine, so that can't be in there, and neither can the rest of the world they live in... AND even after I sell the book or game, anyone can keep using the AEJMANS for free, because they're part of the project under the same CC license.


BUT if someone *else* ends up mapping Hollywood for the project instead of me... then it can't be in my for-sale book or game... cause it's not *ALL* my work anymore.

AND if someone else suggests/makes changes to the AEJMANS in the project discussion, I can't sell them (or material containing them) with those changes.

So if I was GOING to use them in the project, and I realized I wanted to use them later (for something profitable) it's best to not put them in the project at all.
Cause, really, if they're in the project, there WILL be discussion, and improvements, and changes and other people will work on them, and it will be really hard, afterward, to distinguish how much is my sole work, and how much was as a result of the community effort... and.. this is all really confusing.

Korash
02-01-2014, 10:24 AM
Okay, I get it.. it's like... ... and.. this is all really confusing.

But an accurate summation I think :)

Jalyha
02-01-2014, 10:33 AM
Yay! And I like how you quoted the part of my post that summed it all up ;) :P

Glad to know I've figured it out though :D

Azelor
02-01-2014, 11:09 AM
12round: so if I get you point: NC would prohibit selling products related to the project. But I thought that not having an NC license would be a problem since people could use the project for their own benefits, am I wrong?

Jalyha
02-01-2014, 11:25 AM
I thought the point was for it to be a side project? :/

Falconius
02-01-2014, 11:40 AM
If the project were to be commercialized at some point in the future I'd prefer that the proceeds are collected for the benefit of the Cartographers Guild board, to pay server costs etc. Really though I don't want to see it commercialized, which is the reason that I think the things done for this project solely belong to the project and are not shared among you own other things. I'd say the caveat is that as long as they are your own creations and so long as they haven't been incorporated into other parts of the project you can have a certain grace period in order to withdraw them for your own use. Which means that anyone intending to build upon portions of said creations before the grace period (say 30 days) should give notice so they don't get the rug pulled out from under them.

Another note should be that this is not a focused project meant to bang out a full fledged World to use in a certain time frame. This is an ongoing side venture. By its very nature things are going to take a long time to get done. The intention is certainly not to build a commercial product, it is precisely a playground for the hobbyist and professionals on this board to fool around and have some fun in. If you are looking for something more focused and a more serious venture then you are looking in the wrong place. The NC part of my suggested license wasn't there by accident, it was to get people in the right frame of mind for what is happening here.

Falconius
02-01-2014, 12:20 PM
That said I think we should discuss the terms of the licence we want to use more carefully. NC can definitely cause some problems as pointed out here and as Midgardsormr pointed out in the overview thread (http://www.cartographersguild.com/cooperative-worldbuilding-project/25647-cwbp-2-overview-outline-current-activity-regarding-new-co-op-project.html#post232472).

As I said previously I'd like the project to be open for the Cartographers Guild to use for promotion or fund-raising etc. I'm not sure how well the license would break down for the individual contributers though.

Jalyha
02-01-2014, 01:08 PM
If the terms of the license are going to be different than what's already been understood, then everyone who participates should understand/agree to that beforehand. I'm not saying it's a bad idea... just that I don't think anyone should jump into that without understanding what it fully means.

From what I've gathered so far.. that "NC" part is the part that keeps *YOU* from selling and profiting from *MY* part of work on the project.

I'm bad at explaining without a "for instance" so here's one:

The AEJMANS in my other post are mine. I made them. I also spend months of extensive labor on the project. Later, I write a novel with the AEJMANS in it. I can't sell it. But JoeOtherGuy who also worked on the project. (For 2 days, one week, then disappeared) also writes a novel about the AEJMANS. And he's a better writer, and his book sells. But he's selling MY creation. No one who actually invested time in the project is profiting from this. Neither is the guild. Just JoeOtherGuy. Everyone would probably be a little upset by that. But the AEJMANS are MINE. I'm apoplectic.

Now imagine it's your map, or your race, and your novel or game vs someone else's. Do you really want that?

My whole understanding of this project, (which I must admit is incomplete) is that it's supposed to be a fun little uh... to paraphrase someone else's post somewhere "side project for hobbyists". It's supposed to go at a slow relaxed pace. It's not supposed to be profitable for *anyone*. And if you change that at all, it should be profitable for *everyone*.

I honestly don't think that's possible on a project on a public forum where anyone can participate.

I think if someone or a group of someones wants to do that with a community project, they should. But then it's not for fun. It's not a side project. It's not for hobbyists. It's a commercial product. And it needs to be done on a timetable. It will end up needing deadlines, and organized groups and all of those things it doesn't have now. And all of that is completely opposite of what I understood the CWBP to be. Maybe I'm wrong. Either way, I don't think it's a bad idea - just that it *seems to me* like people are now talking about a completely different project. Maybe better, or worse, or neither, but different. Not the same.

So maybe everyone votes, and people who don't like the way it turns out either deal with it, or find something else to do, or maybe the project needs a leader, and the leader decides, and people who don't like it deal with it or find something else to do.

Maybe those who want to hurry have alpha personalities, and the project goes that way without any agreement and the people who don't like it either drop out or feel cheated.

Maybe those who want to take their time have the alpha personalities and the project goes that way without any agreement and the people who don't like it either drop out or feel cheated.

Personally, I think that if a consensus can't be reached, then there should be 2 seperate projects - CWBP2 can go on the way it has been already and CWBP3 can be a commercial project. That way everyone gets to do what they want. But that's the mom in me, trying to get the kids to play *another* game. I'm just saying what *I* see, and I'm just one person.

And maybe I still don't understand any of this as well as I think I do. Feel free to point out where I got it wrong. :)

XOXO

Azelor
02-01-2014, 01:53 PM
I know there are other kind of license available. We need an advice from a lawyer (I know there are at least two in the Guild) or/and the point of view of a contributor of the original project because we need to anticipate problems that might arise later.
I suspect that changing a license in the middle of the project is probably impossible.

I considered that the project could go into publishing at some point but I haven't thought about it more than that since that's not my main motivation.

Redrobes
02-01-2014, 02:23 PM
You can do a CC without the NC as 12Rounds has said. All I am going to say here tho is that the CC license is not limited to the guild. If it has CC BY-SA then another web site could take the whole thing lock stock and sell it. Thats within their rights. You may find some people reluctant to work on a non NC but then maybe people don't care. I have often found that people don't care about the licensing of their work most of the time until someone else is making money off of it then suddenly they do.

Maybe have a vote on this one. If it is CC then would you not work on it unless it had an NC clause or would you only work on it if it didn't have one or you don't care what happens to your maps in it.

Falconius
02-01-2014, 02:29 PM
Is it possible to limit the license to the guild somehow? That would be my preference in any case, NC or not.

My thought is we should error towards the NC side. Doing so doesn't prevent contributers from putting their work in their portfolio after all.

Jalyha
02-01-2014, 02:53 PM
... until someone else is making money off of it then suddenly they do...

My point exactly.

I'm not trying to be a hard-nose here, and I don't *really* get the whole CC thing... but I've worked on "open to the public" type projects before that got ripped off by someone who didn't even participate ... and there was nothing anyone could do about it. So, I just know how this could go.


I also think a poll is a great idea, but I don't think everyone will understand exactly what they are getting or giving up while voting either way.

I'd personally prefer to see it licensed to the guild entirely, than to see it go the way of other things I was a part of, so I think the multiple choice option is best for an initial poll. It could be like... have the first post explain what each option means... including the parts where any random person/site can use/sell it.

Then list like:

I prefer to have the work licenced to the guild

If it is a CC I will not work on it unless it has an NC clause

I will only work on it if it doesn't have an NC clause

I prefer an NC clause but will work on the project without it

I prefer no NC clause but will work on the project without it.

I prefer different rights for different aspects of the project (maps vs the world, or races, elements, whatever)

Frankly my dear, I don't... really care. :o

^Several options because some people won't feel comfortable voting for an "either/or".

Then, once a sufficient (pre-specified) period of time has passed, look at the top couple/few choices and narrow it down with a new poll. "Look, the new options are A) or B). Vote now or forever hold your peace."

It will take longer, but fewer people will be upset/shocked/disturbed by/surprised at the outcome, if they see it coming, as well. AND it gives people time to figure out what they're actually agreeing to.

12rounds
02-01-2014, 04:44 PM
What exactly would "the guild" entail here? This is quite an intriguing option, but I don't really understand how that could be accomplished.

I understand there are worries about someone not related to this at all is taking everything and publishing it if there's no NC in the licensing. But that party on the other hand is again bound by law to publish it with the same free culture license attached - anyone can republish it on a whim. This in turn means that I don't really see anyone suddenly cleaning everything, making a million selling ebooks and retiring to the Bahamas. Consider this: at some point in the future The Guild needs money to survive and puts CWBP under a "pay 5 world dollars to use it to your heart's content". This is not a possibility under a NC license. Perhaps a joint venture by the guild or guild members would produce a batch of printed material without the actual intent of making a profit - not going to happen under NC licensing. There's all sorts of morally and ethically accepted ways the NC clause destroys right out of the bat. It most certainly is not just a question of "do I want to risk some jerk-off making a fortune with my sweat and blood".

Gamerprinter
02-01-2014, 05:17 PM
Perhaps not for the CWBP, but I could see a joint venture under the publisher name and copyright of "Cartographers' Guild" where a controlled collaboration of CG members create map, map tiles, map objects, illustrations and/or adventure products made available at DTRPG under "pay as you want" where all proceeds go to the support the Cartographers' Guild website. If material is not designed for a specific game system (like for Pathfinder, for example), rather 'fluff' material only and game system agnostic - there would be no need for OGL or other licensing concerns. While it could still be a CC derivative license, I don't think using a CC license would be necessarily the best recourse, a fully licensed to the CG might be the way to go. Under 'pay as you want', buyers can pay nothing and download for free, but have the opportunity to contribute if they want (and RPG gamers do pay small amounts for this material).

That way the concern of some third party stealing the material for their own publication would have considerable more protections provided towards the Cartgraphers' Guild's ownership of said material.

Falconius
02-04-2014, 03:28 AM
Could we perhaps have a Copyright belonging collectively to the contributers of the CWBP 2 (or to contributer signing on a thread to collect signatures for the copyright) that retains full rights, but with an allowance for CWBP 2 contributers to use the material freely for further construction. And also allows free use of the material for personal non commercial applications, and with full rights to deal with the commercial aspects as they come up. We could then require a vote with an absolute majority of active signatories in order to release material for commercial purposes on a case by case basis.

Azelor
02-04-2014, 10:11 PM
Could we perhaps have a Copyright belonging collectively to the contributers of the CWBP 2 (or to contributer signing on a thread to collect signatures for the copyright) that retains full rights, but with an allowance for CWBP 2 contributers to use the material freely for further construction. And also allows free use of the material for personal non commercial applications, and with full rights to deal with the commercial aspects as they come up. We could then require a vote with an absolute majority of active signatories in order to release material for commercial purposes on a case by case basis.

So the rights are not given to the individual contributers but to the group as a whole. Seems a good idea, but the last part could become problematic.

Falconius
02-10-2014, 07:40 AM
I'm am working under the assumption that the copyright is collectively owned by the project contributors, and that it is share alike among the contributors, and that we collectively assume all rights. This allows us to alter it as we need by majority vote to accommodate the situation should it change in the future.

Azelor
02-16-2014, 01:41 PM
So, we would define the participant Guild members as the owner. Would that work? I mean, I'm not sure I already saw something like that elsewhere. Maybe copyright laws are more flexible than I think but I have to admit that I don't know much about that.

Something like this ?: Copyright collective - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_collective)

Jalyha
02-16-2014, 02:48 PM
Well... just from reading that, I think a "copyright collective" is more of a payee/trustee sort of thing - managing rights instead of money.


But I get the idea you're reaching for, and I'm sure it can be done, I just don't know how...

jbgibson
02-17-2014, 12:55 AM
When one states "all the participants", one needs to distinguish between all who contributed, or all who are currently contributing. "Active signatories", like Falconius said. It won't be a month after the first map WIP is posted, before somebody not only drops out, but does so in an untraceable, unreachable manner. Maybe it would be sufficient to say if you want to retain a vote in any decision, you have to stay in touch. Decisions may need to be made fairly quickly... people don't have to be vanished to be out of a given decision - most of us go on trips, study for exams, spend time sick, or a thousand other reasons for being unable to communicate. Perhaps the project needs to state up front that no intellectual-property decisions will be finalized in less than X number of days - that way folks can be sure to check in every X-1 days to be sure they never miss out - if it matters to them.

I've been part of cooperative worldbuilding where people who withdraw try to take their stuff with them... that HAS to be understood to be impossible from the start. Not in a use-it-elsewhere sense, but in a remove-it-from-use-here sense. An up-front agreement that in whatever way is concluded in this thread or successor discussions, ALL material contributed remains useable by the project as a whole, in perpetuity. I suppose the retention of A license to use your own stuff might be fine, just not THE SOLE license to do so.

Perhaps a coordinator role needs to be entrusted with more than the usual single in-Guild means of contact; again, if someone wants to be solidly in touch. If copyright and use issues don't much matter to an individual, then the board or private messages may be enough.

Urist
02-17-2014, 09:49 AM
I suppose the retention of A license to use your own stuff might be fine, just not THE SOLE license to do so.
I don't know if this is possible with the stated goal of creating a wholistic world instead of a world composed of puzzle pieces. Because, in the wholistic group designed world, everything should be derivative of previous work, thus nothing would be solely one contributor's work.

Exceptions could probably be found like generic building plans, but anything IP worthy, should be based on the IP of the CWBP2 IP in order to avoid the puzzle piece approach.

Azelor
03-10-2014, 11:57 PM
I agree that once something is submitted to the project it become the propriety of the group. Thus, someone can't withdraw his original content. Unless the rest of the group approves maybe...

I already talked about how many votes do we need to have a legitimate decision but I admit that intellectual-property decisions are a special case. A pretty important one because it could lead to conflict. For that, establishing a list of active contributors could be useful.


On another topic, I would like to settle the copyright issue. What would be the best license for the project? Creative commons ? Commercial or non commercial? Others?
I think the main issues is around the NC clause. Soon, we'll need to vote about this.

Falconius
03-12-2014, 05:59 PM
I think CC is out really as it doesn't allow us enough control over the actual terms. We kind of need some sort of CC type deal restricted to the Guild only and controlled by the active participants in maintaining the CWBP 2 licenses. (ie those CWBP 2 participants who sign up for the responsibility and maintain a guild active status by signing in to the forums like at least every three months.)

Azelor
04-01-2014, 10:51 PM
We kind of need some sort of CC type deal restricted to the Guild only and controlled by the active participants in maintaining the CWBP 2 licenses.

Is that possible ? and what license would apply for everyone else?

For the list I suggest that someone should be designed to keep track of the members. As you said, every three month (or it could be shorter/longer), the person in charge would need to check if the members where active (last time they were connected).

Falconius
04-02-2014, 02:18 AM
It would be treated as a normal copyright overall, in control of the CWPB 2 copyright board. Membership to the board merely requires one to volunteer and have something contributed to the project and to maintain activity. Activity would only have to be checked if a copyright issue came up, like someone want to publish something or whatever. Although I don't see it as a likely problem here in the guild, board members who are causing problems or trolling or whatever can be removed by a 2/3 majority vote from the rest of the board.

Within the guild we would treat it as CC for personal use and for further development but we (CWBP 2 Copyright Board) would still retain full rights. So if people wanted to use it outside of the guild they'd have to apply to us for permission.

That's how I think it ought to be handled, but really talking about legal stuff is really unpleasant, so if anyone has any objections or additions they'd like to add or bring up I say we wrap this up and move forward on this assumption.

Azelor
04-02-2014, 03:56 PM
I'm fine with that.
Maybe a vote is in order? The timing seems pretty bad since there is not a lot of activity around here.