PDA

View Full Version : Question Regarding Ownership



gspRooster
01-30-2014, 11:48 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, 01:04 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, 01:58 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
01-31-2014, 12:30 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.

Jalyha
01-31-2014, 12:35 AM
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, 04:24 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, 06:57 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, 10:55 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, 11:18 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, 11:29 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, 11:34 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, 11:46 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, 12:22 PM
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, 05:43 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, 05:52 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, 10:45 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, 11:24 AM
Okay, I get it.. it's like... ... and.. this is all really confusing.

But an accurate summation I think :)

Jalyha
02-01-2014, 11:33 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, 12:09 PM
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, 12:25 PM
I thought the point was for it to be a side project? :/

Falconius
02-01-2014, 12:40 PM
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, 01:20 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, 02:08 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, 02:53 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, 03:23 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, 03:29 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, 03:53 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, 05:44 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, 06:17 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, 04:28 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, 11:11 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, 08:40 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, 02:41 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, 03:48 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, 01:55 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, 10:49 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
03-11-2014, 12:57 AM
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, 06:59 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, 11:51 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, 03:18 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, 04:56 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.

Azelor
09-01-2014, 02:27 PM
Decisions concerning general aspects of the material is the privilege of the Council members. Including: legal matters, the license, general direction of the project, approval of commercial projects...

Council : To become a council member, people need to submit at least one contribution and they need to sign in on a list (http://www.cartographersguild.com/cooperative-worldbuilding-project/28194-cwbp-2-copyright-board.html)
- The site administrators of the Cartographer's Guild are also part of the Council since they are maintaining this space.
- In extraordinary circumstances Council members can be denied of their privileges if 2/3 of the Council members vote against them. (but we can't get them rid of their rights on their personal contributions)
- It is possible to amend the license with the support of 2/3 of the Council members.
- The Council members take decisions by voting. The vote is made public to ensure that only Council members votes are counted.
- Votes concerning legal matters should last a full month to let the active Council members sufficient time to vote. A normal vote is won with 50%+1 of the votes.


*Votes concerning non legal matters such as the description of different world elements and general opinion are open to every member of the Guild. The vote can be held public or in secret. The voting period should be around 3 or 4 days. Usually, a simple majority is required to win.


-Contributors of the project can use, modify and publish material that they own including for commercial purposes. If they do publish, they just need to inform the community.
-Contributors can also publish content that they don't own if they manage to get the approval of the other author(s).
-Everyone can use, modify the material of the project for personal or artistic purposes. They can share their derivative work as long as they have the approval of the original author. But they cannot use the content for commercial purposes.

The material used in the project should respect copyrights. You can't have material that is non commercial unless you have the approval of the author to do so.

Once something enters the project, either an image or a full-fledged idea, it become part of the project. If the content is, for some reason rejected, it can't be used in the project or any derivative work on it without the consent of the author.
Material can be taken out but it need the approval of all contributors.

- To publish a project: the first step is to submit the project to the community. Even if the person is publishing her own work, the community need to be informed. In that case, it's just a formality. When the project is bigger and include more than one author, a vote is usually required. After the project is submitted, the concerned authors will need to express their approval or disapproval of the project. There are no time limit for the authors the express themselves, refusal or simply a lack of answer means he can't publish it or need to publish only the content to which the authors agreed.

Falconius
09-01-2014, 03:04 PM
All project materials are to remain on this site other than those used for personal purposes (ie to print for a game you are running etc.).

The "community" is defined by the contributors to the CWBP 2 project (this also implies the site administrators since they are maintaining this space).

I would say that we need to make a distinction regarding personal works contributes to the project. For instance do people get the copyright over the material they contribute? They should I think up and till it is finished and becomes part of the project officially. So for instance WIP's belong to the person doing it, finished maps and materials (as determined by their creator) belong to the project. Materials based on the project though have to respect the copyright of the CWBP 2 project and thus cannot be used for commercial purposes without the say so of the community. (so for instance if you make a map, it remains restricted to your personal use as it uses coastlines, features etc based on CWBP 2 work previously completed).

Instead of community I still think we should use a copyright board, where the membership is strictly voluntary and all that is required is that one has contributed a finished product to the project and wants to be part of the job, and that they have maintain a presence on the sight within six months (ie if they are inactive (haven't logged in) for more than six months they loose their spot on the copyright board until they come back and volunteer again). This allows people to not be involved with this legal stuff if they don't want to or to be a part if they do want to and ensures that decisions will get made in a relatively timely manner rather than waiting indefinitely long for an absolute majority of everyone who has contributed.

Without approval of the community no one can can modify or use this material off site other than for their own personal purposes

Azelor
09-02-2014, 11:46 AM
I would say that we need to make a distinction regarding personal works contributes to the project. For instance do people get the copyright over the material they contribute? They should I think up and till it is finished and becomes part of the project officially. So for instance WIP's belong to the person doing it, finished maps and materials (as determined by their creator) belong to the project. Materials based on the project though have to respect the copyright of the CWBP 2 project and thus cannot be used for commercial purposes without the say so of the community. (so for instance if you make a map, it remains restricted to your personal use as it uses coastlines, features etc based on CWBP 2 work previously completed).

I think it's complicated to give copyright to only one person since they are always basing their work on something else or taking ideas from someone else. Everything is tied up. Saying that something belongs to someone is easier for maps maybe but could become trickier with other things such as world descriptions. One description could include several authors and if you incorporates the rights only when it's done, it could take a while to have these rights into the project. When do you consider a country's description finished, there is always something to add.

So my point is that it's really hard to get the personal copyright over the material inside the project. But if it's possible, it should have a license similar to the project to allow other members of the project to use this material.

Another point is that, all the material used such as brushes and textures should allow commercial purposes? It make things easier if we or someone in the project decide to publish.



Instead of community I still think we should use a copyright board, where the membership is strictly voluntary and all that is required is that one has contributed a finished product to the project and wants to be part of the job, and that they have maintain a presence on the sight within six months (ie if they are inactive (haven't logged in) for more than six months they loose their spot on the copyright board until they come back and volunteer again). This allows people to not be involved with this legal stuff if they don't want to or to be a part if they do want to and ensures that decisions will get made in a relatively timely manner rather than waiting indefinitely long for an absolute majority of everyone who has contributed.

it's not enough to participate, members also need to sign in a thread. They need to be approved on the list before they can vote. If it's what you mean, it make sense to me.

I don't think that we need to expel inactive members. Inactive or active, if people don't vote, it's all the same.

Falconius
09-02-2014, 12:36 PM
I think it's complicated to give copyright to only one person since they are always basing their work on something else or taking ideas from someone else. Everything is tied up. Saying that something belongs to someone is easier for maps maybe but could become trickier with other things such as world descriptions. One description could include several authors and if you incorporates the rights only when it's done, it could take a while to have these rights into the project. When do you consider a country's description finished, there is always something to add.

So my point is that it's really hard to get the personal copyright over the material inside the project. But if it's possible, it should have a license similar to the project to allow other members of the project to use this material. Yeah it's extremely difficult. My worry is just that it will limit peoples participation if they feel that their material is no longer "theirs" simply by virtue of it being part of the CWBP 2. I'd like to solve this issue somehow but am not sure how.


Another point is that, all the material used such as brushes and textures should allow commercial purposes? It make things easier if we or someone in the project decide to publish. I'm not sure what you are trying to say here. The CWBP 2 is not going to own any brushes or other building materials. However it maintains the right to use any materials used in it's projects fully. This means that it will be licensed to use maps with brushes or fonts for whatever purposes it wishes (publishing the maps etc.). This also means people should try and use fonts or brushes that are licence free or completely open license or it means they have to list the owners of the font or brushes so we know what we can publish or not or who we can get permission from (should the question ever arrive, it seems unlikely to me). Really, not being an illustrator I'm really not up to speed on all this stuff, but rather just outlining my thoughts on the matter.



it's not enough to participate, members also need to sign in a thread. They need to be approved on the list before they can vote. If it's what you mean, it make sense to me.

I don't think that we need to expel inactive members. Inactive or active, if people don't vote, it's all the same.Yeah that's pretty much what I meant. We start a thread called CWBP 2 Copyright Members or something and if people want to be part of it they go there and post a reply signing up as a volunteer. But there is also the caveat to be eligible to join the Copyright Membership that they have contributed something to the project already, like a map or whatever (ie they have something vested in the project).

For the vote yeah your right we could just count the total votes after a certain time period (say a month) and that's the total used no whining about it after the fact. Even if its only one or two.

As distasteful as this subject is and despite the fact that I doubt it will actually come into play that much, you are right, it is important to resolve pretty soon.

Azelor
09-02-2014, 02:25 PM
What I meant was that we can't use material that is non commercial. Using NC material might cause problems later. I don't know how much this will be limiting the possibilities.

Some will say yes if we ask them, other (corporation) are not so nice but I guess we need to make a thread about them. But we will deal with this case by case.

Azelor
09-03-2014, 06:46 PM
do people get the copyright over the material they contribute?

Good question: while it is feasible for a map since the WIP and Finished steps are clearly defined, I don't see the appeal to do it. There is a large possibility that the person used content of the project to do the map. There is not much to pull out without infringing the copyrights. I would say that it's better to not allow it but maybe other thinks otherwise.


and another thing
People outside the project should be able to participate too. Voting for stuff unrelated to the copyright but I'm not sure how to put it in words.

I updated the other post #42 (good number)

Falconius
09-03-2014, 08:28 PM
do people get the copyright over the material they contribute?

Good question: while it is feasible for a map since the WIP and Finished steps are clearly defined, I don't see the appeal to do it. There is a large possibility that the person used content of the project to do the map. There is not much to pull out without infringing the copyrights. I would say that it's better to not allow it but maybe other thinks otherwise. We can just run it that way at the beginning and figure it out later if it ever comes up. Oooor... I don't see an alternative actually. In order to protect the work people put into the project we have to protect the project which means peoples work becomes part of the project and is not 'really' their own any more.



and another thing
People outside the project should be able to participate too. Voting for stuff unrelated to the copyright but I'm not sure how to put it in words.
The Copyright Board would deal strictly with the legal stuff and nothing else. Participation and all other project concerns would remain completely open to the community here. Not sure if this is what you meant or not.


I updated the other post #42 (good number)Hehe, indeed.

Azelor
09-03-2014, 10:28 PM
We can just run it that way at the beginning and figure it out later if it ever comes up. Oooor... I don't see an alternative actually. In order to protect the work people put into the project we have to protect the project which means peoples work becomes part of the project and is not 'really' their own any more.


Yes it's possible to modify it afterward.


The Copyright Board would deal strictly with the legal stuff and nothing else. Participation and all other project concerns would remain completely open to the community here. Not sure if this is what you meant or not.

I'm not sure. Do you mean the people registered as contributers are part of the Copyright board? That's how I understand it, so everyone is allowed to vote concerning non legal stuff. They are allowed now that I just modified the other post, again.


and, do we need to vote on this? I know it's important but I don't think most people are interested by this gibberish. I did try to include opinions submitted by other members over time, so we should please most people with it.

Falconius
09-04-2014, 05:53 AM
I'm not sure. Do you mean the people registered as contributors are part of the Copyright board? That's how I understand it, so everyone is allowed to vote concerning non legal stuff. They are allowed now that I just modified the other post, again.
People who are part of the copyright board are CWBP 2 contributors who have signed up in a thread to volunteer for the Copyright Board. So not all CWBP 2 contributors are part of the board (though they could be if they signed up). Contributors in this sense are any people who have put work into developing the project, whether it be mapping a plot or developing information for a plot or assisting in the construction of the world map etc. So, to reiterate a Copyright Board member is a Contributor and also a signee on the Copyright Board thread.

and, do we need to vote on this? I know it's important but I don't think most people are interested by this gibberish. I did try to include opinions submitted by other members over time, so we should please most people with it.

I think were there any objections to the direction we are headed they would've popped up by now. In this case I think we can take silence as an assent. Truthfully I'm not too interested in this gibberish either, but one doesn't always get to avoid the bull**** when working on a farm.

Azelor
09-04-2014, 12:42 PM
Right but it need to be done. The sooner the better.

I modified the message #42 again.



Contributors and Board members can publish commercial material only if they have the approval of at least 50%+1 of the Board members. (Even contributers can publish commercial stuff, does that sound good ?)

Are the admins automatically part of the Board?

Once something enters the project, either an image or just an idea, it become the propriety of the contributors. (contributer or Board, I think it's the first but I'm not sure)
Material can be taken out but it need the approval of all active contributors. (Public vote) (I tend to prefer to let them vote because they are also part of the project and they own parts of the copyright)



My feeling is that some people (or a lot of them) will contribute once or sporadicly to the project. These people won't want to be involved with the complicated stuff. Those interested will join the Board. But even if they don't join, they do keep their rights.

Falconius
09-04-2014, 07:41 PM
On the post about the board members you started people are only included if they actually want to be, so I don't think everyone listed there will actually be a part of it. It is going to be operated as an open board so that should a subject of copyright interest someone they can volunteer for the board vote on it and then leave if they so desire.... hmm, no maybe your way is best... I think it is. Less complicated. We should make a caveat that votes last a certain period and after that period everyone who cares will be assumed to have noted the subject and voted. I think a month is an appropriate period. They can be longer of course but no shorter.

I still think it takes a certain amount of ratification for the board to assume control of an image or an idea. Obviously anything based on the CWBP 2 materials will fall under it's purview, but if an idea is say presented and then rejected it remains the sole property of its creator. Perhaps we should actually make it so that the board retains copyright privileges over it's material, but so do individual creators of their specific material unless they waive their rights to it. So for instance a guy makes a map, and later on the board would like to publish the map, they cannot do so without his permission, and the same thing if a guy wants to publish his CWBP 2 map he requires the boards permission to do so (outside of his own personal use, obviously they can put their creations on their websites or portfolios etc.).

Azelor
09-04-2014, 08:33 PM
So for instance a guy makes a map, and later on the board would like to publish the map, they cannot do so without his permission, and the same thing if a guy wants to publish his CWBP 2 map he requires the boards permission to do so (outside of his own personal use, obviously they can put their creations on their websites or portfolios etc.).

It could work if it's only his map that is going to be published but it would probably include something much larger than that. And it might be hard to get the approval if he's inactive.

Falconius
09-05-2014, 05:18 AM
Then we won't be able to include his map, we'd have to make a new one I guess.

Azelor
09-05-2014, 11:42 AM
But this comes in contradiction with the idea that once someone gives something to the project, it remains in the project. People are aware of that before sending it.

Falconius
09-05-2014, 12:09 PM
Not really, it just gives them final say in the publishing of their work and ensures they get compensation since they have veto power.

Azelor
09-05-2014, 02:02 PM
ok but if we can't contact them ?

Falconius
09-06-2014, 03:05 PM
Basically their map can't be part of the package, either we make a new map or we leave it out. People need final say over their own work.

Azelor
09-06-2014, 08:43 PM
I'm trying to understand but is it possible that your last point is making the Copyright board useless?

In order to publish something, the person need the approval of all the contributers included in that part. If one of them says no, or does not answer, he can't publish that part. So if someone want to publish a map that is part of the world map, he needs the approval of : me, you, Dearcyrus, Thurlor and possibly others.

But it get more complicated if you take into account that the map is just one part of it. Names, places, descriptions are all linked together and could include several authors. Even if it's just the maps, their names and ideas are on that map, you also need their approval. Your point makes it almost impossible to publish anything unless we are the author at 100% (something rare considering it's a collaborative project and people are encouraged to work together). I don't know if this is what you want but that is how I understand it. Legally it allows commercial purposes but not in practice (or it's just really difficult).



Back to the Board: only people related to the part to be published are supposed to give their opinion. Meaning that the Board will change completely depending on the vote.



To simplify things we could ask are collective rights more important than individual rights or is it the opposite ? It's a general question of law to which I don't have an answer.



I must say that when I think about a commercial project I see something like a campaign setting, like : Forgotten Realms, Dark Sun, Greyhawk, Eberron, Dragonlance... (the specific RPG system might not be important)
That is why I'm worried that it could be difficult since we would need everything. If we have something specific in mind, like a campaign setting, we could ask for the right to publish beforehand. We could maybe, but for just one specific thing. The other publishing projects would need to seek approval like mentioned earlier.

Falconius
09-07-2014, 06:49 AM
The distinction I'm thinking of is their finished work, like and illustration or a story or whatever. Clearly the materials that the work draws upon are CWBP 2 property (like the world map, names, histories, etc. sort of like brushes or fonts I suppose) but the work itself should need final approval of the person who made it before the board can release it. This doesn't mean they have a say in work derived from theirs, as it is part of the CWBP 2, it only means that CWBP 2 can't make commercial moves with their specific creations without them. Meaning they can't be arbitrarily cut out of the loop and screwed. They can also make a deceleration relinquishing their right of final approval which would of course give CWBP Copyright board freedom to manage it as they wish.

To the Board: No the board decides on all matters regarding copyright with whoever decides to participate (ie vote), regardless of whether or not they had a hand in that particular element. Undoubtedly it will tend to be those involved that are most interested in that particular vote, but it is not limited.

Azelor
09-07-2014, 12:10 PM
I guess it make sense. Still, it would be cool if those that were in favor of the commercial license could speak on that issue. They are the one most affected by this.


And what do you think about the campaign setting idea ?

Falconius
09-07-2014, 05:09 PM
I kinda thought that's what we were doing once you enlightened my mind that it was more than maps. Are we not making a campaign setting? I don't think you can do world building without automatically doing the other. Or are you looking for something more specific?

Azelor
09-07-2014, 05:47 PM
Yes that is the aim, it's the direction I want to go. And if the goal is to make a coherent campaign setting, is it possible to ask for the commercial rights in advance, only for this specific matter?

I'm not saying it will happen but it would be good to have that possibility.

Saying: I would like to publish a campaign setting maybe, eventually ... It's not very specific. If we would do it, we might need more information than that.

Falconius
09-07-2014, 05:57 PM
Ah I see what you are saying. Perhaps. Perhaps make a caveat that all materials is understood to be released for use in case we ever publish a comprehensive campaign setting. Also need to ensure that the proceeds will be divided equally among the contributors used in the package after costs are covered.

Azelor
09-08-2014, 12:31 PM
That's what I was thinking.

Azelor
09-08-2014, 08:07 PM
- the term copyright broad sound confusing: look more like a legislature since copyrights is not really what they are dealing with. We could name it assembly or council instead. Yea, supreme council.
- People outside of the board can decide on copyright issues if they are concerned. Board members only have a say if their work is involved?
- how it work: The first step is to submit the project to the community. Even if the person is publishing her own work, the community need to be informed. In that case, it's just a formality. When the project is bigger and include more than one author, a vote is usually required. After the project is submitted, the concerned authors will need to express their approval or disapproval of the project. There are no time limit for the authors the express themselves, refusal or simply a lack of answer means he can't publish it or need to publish only the content to which the authors agreed

Once something enters the project, either an image or a full-fledged idea, it become ( part of the campaign setting project). If the content is, for some reason rejected, it can't be used in the project or any derivative work on it without the consent of the author.

Azelor
09-10-2014, 01:45 PM
Definition loosely based on the Wikipedia page:

A campaign setting is a fictional world which serves as a setting for adventures to take place in role-playing game, or for story telling.
Usually a campaign setting is designed for a specific game or a specific genre of game (such as Medieval fantasy, or outer space/science fiction adventure).
Examples of campaign setting: List of campaign settings - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_campaign_settings)



We could make it mandatory to agree to a possible future campaign setting publication for every piece of art submitted. Everything submitted is subject to be part of it. I don't know if this will happen, it's hard to judge what I need to add on this. Royalties could go partially to the Guild and the rest, divided among contributors. According to their contribution or equally distributed? What about old members that are off the radar ? they also deserve some of it. It could be made their responsibility to at least keep some contact with the project.

One problem I see with the actual license we have now is that anyone can publish stuff under the NC license, and they don't even require permission do do so. They could publish the whole setting.
Maybe it should be made impossible to redistribute more than x of the project or make redistribution rights the privilege of the contributers? I mean, if they want to share their derivative works, they can but need the approval of the original author.
If they want to share it without asking the consent of the author they can simply join the project.
What about the privilege of the contributers? could they publish a work on which they don't have the rights even if it's NC without asking?

Falconius
09-10-2014, 03:15 PM
We aren't using NC or any other creative commons copyrights, we decided they didn't work for us way earlier in the thread. The CWBP 2 has fully control of the copyright with contributors having final say over their specific work if they want to prevent something they made from being published. We will need their assent to publish anything, if there is no response from them we must assume we don't have it and either not publish that work or remake it. All materials contributed to the project however are freely available to project members. Becoming a project member merely requires that one participate, by making something or contributing something. The CWBP 2 is collectively "owned" by its members.

If we publish we can work out the details then, but I think the proceeds should be distributed (after covering costs) equally to any of the contributes with finished material in the package. ie if you wrote and finished a story and it was included in the package, or you made a map, you'd receive a split of the profits. So this would exclude those who only made foundational material that other stuff is based on, but wasn't actually included in the package. So for instance if we (Azelor and myself) decided not to actually publish the world map and neither of us did anything else that was actually finished enough to make it in the product we would not be compensated despite the fact that other things that were included were based off of our world (assuming we weren't editing or doing some other contribution towards publication).

Azelor
09-10-2014, 04:43 PM
by using NC I mean: someone sharing a derivative work for free, obviously.

So, we do not allow derivative work for people outside the project.
And those inside the project can use the material as they like as long as it stays in the project otherwise they need the approval of the author(s) even if it's not to make money.

Is that better ?

Falconius
09-10-2014, 05:02 PM
They'd need the approval of the Supreme Council, as it is the CWBP 2 that owns the rights. We would likely not have to vote on such an issue unless someone objects though, so it would just be a formality.

Azelor
09-10-2014, 10:33 PM
I made an update, now I just need to do the part on the campaign setting:

Decisions concerning general aspects of the material is the privilege of the Council members. Including: legal matters, the license, general direction of the project, approval of commercial projects...

Council : To become a council member, people need to submit at least one contribution and they need to sign in on a list (CWBP 2 : Copyright Board)
- The site administrators of the Cartographer's Guild are also part of the Council since they are maintaining this space.
- In extraordinary circumstances Council members can be denied of their privileges if 2/3 of the Council members vote against them. (but we can't get them rid of their rights on their personal contributions)
- It is possible to amend the license with the support of 2/3 of the Council members.
- The Council members take decisions by voting. The vote is made public to ensure that only Council members votes are counted.
- Votes concerning legal matters should last a full month to let the active Council members sufficient time to vote. A normal vote is won with 50%+1 of the votes.


*Votes concerning non legal matters such as the description of different world elements and general opinion are open to every member of the Guild. The vote can be held public or in secret. The voting period should be around 3 or 4 days. Usually, a simple majority is required to win.


-Contributors of the project can use, modify and publish material that they own including for commercial purposes. If they do publish, they just need to inform the community.
-Contributors can also publish content that they don't own if they manage to get the approval of the other author(s).
-Everyone can use, modify the material of the project for personal or artistic purposes. They can share their derivative work as long as they have the approval of the original author. But they cannot use the content for commercial purposes.

The material used in the project should respect copyrights. You can't have material that is non commercial unless you have the approval of the author to do so.

Once something enters the project, either an image or a full-fledged idea, it become part of the project.
The main goal of the project is too create a campaign setting and to be able to publish it. Example of campaign settings: List of campaign settings - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_campaign_settings)
To do that, we need the contributers to agree that their work could be used in a publication, including a commercial publication. The profits would be distributed equally to all contributers that have material in the publication.
It's not sure if it will happen but we need to ask before people commit to the project, otherwise it will becomes impossible to contact everyone.
If the content is, for some reason rejected, it can't be used in the project or any derivative work on it without the consent of the author.


- To publish a project: the first step is to submit the project to the community. Even if the person is publishing her own work, the community need to be informed. In that case, it's just a formality. When the project is bigger and include more than one author, a vote is usually required. After the project is submitted, the concerned authors will need to express their approval or disapproval of the project. There are no time limit for the authors the express themselves, refusal or simply a lack of answer means he can't publish it or need to publish only the content to which the authors agreed.

allie
09-11-2014, 01:17 AM
If you want an opinion on the subject the voting process does give you a chance to get this opinion acroos

Azelor
09-12-2014, 11:11 AM
I updated the massage #71. I hope it's almost the final form.

Opinions are welcome.

Azelor
09-15-2014, 02:00 PM
If nobody expresses concern I guess they agree with it, or we need to vote ?

Frankly, I don't think that a vote will draw more participants.

Falconius
09-15-2014, 02:52 PM
It looks pretty good to me. I'd just make sure that you specify in the one month time limit of the vote that only votes cast durring that period are counted towards the tally, and that it is only a majority requiremnt of the tallied votes (rather than the entire council).

I'd also try to give the section dealing with personal rights over their own work a little more clarity... and add a line that completed works of their making can only be published with their approval (with the possible exception of publishing the world setting, which they are already assumed to have given consent for. If however you include this caveat, you also need to make sure that they will recive appropraite compensation. I'd say an equal share of the profits of those who have finished work in the particular publication. Or make it assumed that they have given permission for publication in the case of our publishing a campaign setting with an allowence to withdraw their finished work if they speak up at the relevent time (X months before the project is finalized for print)?).

(oh man, I'm at the computer without spell check again :( )

Azelor
09-15-2014, 10:32 PM
addition in blue

Decisions concerning general aspects of the material is the privilege of the Council members. Including: legal matters, the license, general direction of the project, approval of commercial projects...

Council : To become a council member, people need to submit at least one contribution and they need to sign in on a list (CWBP 2 : Copyright Board)
- The site administrators of the Cartographer's Guild are also part of the Council since they are maintaining this space.
- In extraordinary circumstances Council members can be denied of their privileges if 2/3 of the Council members vote against them. (but we can't get them rid of their rights on their personal contributions)
- It is possible to amend the license with the support of 2/3 of the Council members.
- The Council members take decisions by voting. The vote is made public to ensure that only Council members votes are counted.
- Votes concerning legal matters should last a full month to let the active Council members sufficient time to vote. A normal vote is won with 50%+1 of the votes cast at the end of the voting period.


*Votes concerning non legal matters such as the description of different world elements and general opinion are open to every member of the Guild. The vote can be held public or in secret. The voting period should be around 3 or 4 days. Usually, a simple majority is required to win.


-Contributors of the project can use, modify and publish material that they own. If they do publish, they just need to inform the community.
-Everyone can use, modify the material of the project for personal or artistic purposes. They can share their derivative work as long as they have the approval of the original author. But they cannot use the content for commercial purposes.

The material used in the project should respect copyrights. You can't have material that is non commercial unless you have the approval of the author to do so.

Once something enters the project, either an image or a full-fledged idea, it become part of the project.
The main goal of the project is too create a campaign setting and to be able to publish it. Example of campaign settings: List of campaign settings - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
To do that, we need the contributers to agree that their work could be used in a publication, including a commercial publication. The profits would be distributed equally to all contributers that have material in the publication.
It's not sure if it will happen but we need to ask before people commit to the project, otherwise it will becomes impossible to contact everyone.
If the content is, for some reason rejected, it can't be used in the project or any derivative work on it without the consent of the author.
Every publication need the approval of the other expect for the campaign setting project.


- To publish a project: the first step is to submit the project to the community. Even if the person is publishing her own work, the community need to be informed. In that case, it's just a formality. When the project is bigger and include more than one author, a vote is usually required. After the project is submitted, the concerned authors will need to express their approval or disapproval of the project. There are no time limit for the authors the express themselves, refusal or simply a lack of answer means he can't publish it or need to publish only the content to which the authors agreed.

Falconius
09-16-2014, 04:39 AM
That votes outside of the voting period don't matter and that only the votes cast during that period are counted towards the majority. So that if there are 3 votes total and two are yes and one no it passes, or if there are a total of 9 votes and 3 are yes and 6 no then its a no. The way you have it written now is correct, but a person could mistakenly read it to mean that you need a 50%+1 majority of the entire council rather than a 50%+1 majority of the actual participating votes. I think you need to emphasise the "votes" part more.

Either way it is not a correction just more emphasis, I think we can put our stamp of approval on this and move on to the fun stuff.

waldronate
09-16-2014, 05:04 AM
move on to the fun stuff.

You mean that a bureacracy death spiral isn't the fun part?!???

Azelor
09-16-2014, 12:01 PM
Ok, I tried to make it better.

Now we just need to improve clarity as you said, but I don't know how I can improve it.

Falconius
09-16-2014, 12:15 PM
Looks good. It'll take time to clarify it I think, even lawyers do a terrible job at making things clear, which is why every legal document they write looks like the work of a demented idiot. This works for now, you should post it in the copy write board thread of the Supreme Council.

Azelor
09-17-2014, 12:02 AM
it is because lawyers and legislators are trying to anticipate the holes and this is not always easy as I just learned. It's not possible to cover everything but we can always amend it later.
Reading a new law usually consist in modifications of other laws. Such as : replace the word here by that word at these places. It's really hard to understand what the document is about if you don't have an idea of the broad picture.

I was more or less serious about the Supreme council since it was the name of the Soviet legislature. But since other countries also use it (including democracies) , I don't see a problem with that name anymore.

waldronate
09-17-2014, 12:57 AM
Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal (http://www.smbc-comics.com/?id=3470#comic) may apply...

12rounds
09-17-2014, 02:16 AM
If nobody expresses concern I guess they agree with it, or we need to vote ?

Frankly, I don't think that a vote will draw more participants.
A vote is in order. Personally I expressed my opinion (I'm an advocate of CC-BY) earlier but it's not a popular one.

If I'm understanding correctly, all the proposed rules mean that the project can not use anything CC.

Falconius
09-17-2014, 05:15 AM
A vote is in order. Personally I expressed my opinion (I'm an advocate of CC-BY) earlier but it's not a popular one.

If I'm understanding correctly, all the proposed rules mean that the project can not use anything CC.That is a good point I didn't think of that. You can still use CC I think, just not anything with a SA, ND or NC, which rules out a lot of stuff I imagine.

I just looked at the CC licenses again and they really do not seem to suit our needs. These are some of our needs as I can see it right now: The ability to share and use material freely within the project. The ability to protect the project from theft. Maintaining the option to be able to develop as a commercial enterprise if desired at a later date. Ensuring participants are properly compensated and attributed.

CC licenses don't really cover a group project that well, they would also restrict our ability to commercialize it later on, and they wouldn't have great allowance to to protection from theft. Most importantly it would also lock most of our material in a system from which we would not reasonably be able to alter the terms of the copyright.

Azelor
09-17-2014, 03:05 PM
A vote is in order. Personally I expressed my opinion (I'm an advocate of CC-BY) earlier but it's not a popular one.

If I'm understanding correctly, all the proposed rules mean that the project can not use anything CC.

We are still open to improve the current license.

Midgardsormr
09-17-2014, 05:03 PM
You mean that a bureacracy death spiral isn't the fun part?!???

Some people juggle geese. I'm just sayin'.

Azelor
09-18-2014, 02:09 PM
Unless someone disagree, I will submit the actual license to a vote in a couple of hours. 7 days of voting should be more than enough.

-Contributor: to be considered a contributor, people need to submit at least one
-Contributors of the project can use, modify and publish material that they own. If they do publish, they just need to inform the community.
-Everyone can use, modify the material of the project for personal or artistic purposes. They can share their derivative work as long as they have the approval of the original author. But they cannot use the content for commercial purposes.


Council: Decisions concerning general aspects of the material are the privilege of the Council members. Including: legal matters, the license, general direction of the project, approval of commercial projects.
To become a council member, people need to submit at least one contribution and they need to sign in on a list
- The site administrators of the Cartographer's Guild are also part of the Council since they are maintaining this space.
- In extraordinary circumstances, council members can be denied of their privileges if 2/3 of the council members vote against them. But they always keep their rights on their work.
- It is possible to amend the license with the support of 2/3 of the council members.
- The council members take decisions by voting. The vote is made public to ensure that only council members votes are counted.
- Votes concerning legal matters should last a full month to let the active council members sufficient time to vote. A normal vote is won with 50%+1 of the votes cast at the end of the voting period.

*Votes concerning non legal matters such as the description of different world elements and general opinion are open to every member of the Guild. The voting period should be around 3 or 4 days. Usually, a simple majority is required to win.


Once something enters the project, either an image or a full-fledged idea, it become part of the project. If the content is, for some reason rejected, it can't be used in the project or any derivative work on it without the consent of the author. The material used in the project should respect copyrights. You can't have material that is non commercial unless you have the approval of the author to do so.


Campaign setting: The main goal of the project is too create a campaign setting and to be able to publish it. Example of campaign settings: List of campaign settings - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

To do that, we need the contributors to agree (itís mandatory) that their work could be used in a publication, including a commercial publication. The profits would be distributed equally to all contributors that have material in the publication. At this stage, we are not if this will happen but we need to ask before people commit to the project, otherwise it will become impossible to contact everyone.



To publish a project: the first step is to submit the project to the community. Even if the person is publishing her own work, the community need to be informed. In that case, it's just a formality. When the project includes more than one author, a vote is usually required. After the project is submitted, the concerned authors will need to express their approval or disapproval of the project. There are no time limit for the authors the express themselves, refusal or simply a lack of answer means it can't be published as itís only possible to publish content to which the authors agreed.
Every publication needs the approval of its original author(s).