Homebrew Protection

[Fax Celestis]

I know this forum has a Terms of Service that you agree to on signing up. Would it be possible to add a paragraph to the ToS stating that, "Any and all posts made are sole property of their respective posters," or somesuch? The recent furor on the WotC fora has made me a bit paranoiac about my creations.

[Quincunx]

Did they claim that the forums' ToS overrode authors' copyright? Authors' copyright ought to have been established prior to posting on the website, and therefore not breakable. . .

[Fax Celestis]

Did they claim that the forums' ToS overrode authors' copyright? Authors' copyright ought to have been established prior to posting on the website, and therefore not breakable. . .

Here's the relevant bit:


Originally Posted by Wizards.com & Gleemax.com Website Terms of Use - Last Updated: August 16, 2007
1. User Content

By posting or submitting any text, images, designs, video, sound, code, data, lists, or other materials or information (such User-submitted content, collectively, "User Content") to or through a Site, including without limitation on any User profile page, you hereby irrevocably grant to Wizards, its affiliates and sublicensees, a worldwide, perpetual, irrevocable, royalty-free, non-exclusive, and fully sub-licensable license, to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such User Content (in whole or in part) in any media and to incorporate the User Content into other works in any format or medium now known or later developed. The foregoing grants shall include the right to exploit any proprietary rights in such User Content, including but not limited to rights under copyright, trademark, service mark or patent laws under any relevant jurisdiction.

Translation: By posting anything to a WotC-related site, you grant them the irrevocable ability to license (royalty-free) and use (or build off of) anything you post on their webspace. Doing so forgoes the proprietary rights of copyright, trademark, and patent.

[Reinboom]

A reference to stat blocks being part of the OGL, and then all other content being held to their respective persons I believe would be more fitting.
Since I believe the entire stat block/table format does belong to wizards - albeit still OGC.
My understanding of this is a bit fickle, however.

[Fax Celestis]

A reference to stat blocks being part of the OGL, and then all other content being held to their respective persons I believe would be more fitting.
Since I believe the entire stat block/table format does belong to wizards - albeit still OGC.
My understanding of this is a bit fickle, however.

I believe that's true, yes, but that's just the format, not the material within.

[AKA_Bait]

I know this forum has a Terms of Service that you agree to on signing up. Would it be possible to add a paragraph to the ToS stating that, "Any and all posts made are sole property of their respective posters," or somesuch? The recent furor on the WotC fora has made me a bit paranoiac about my creations.

This sounds like a very good idea to me. Although the language would need to be fleshed out a little more thoroughly. I presume that people want to be able to allow non-commercial use of their creations, i.e. my using your monster in my homegame (which I am supergrateful for by the way).

Also, something would need to be put in clearly in the language that indicates that he mods can still move, lock, edit, and delete posts as they see fit. They need that power and a blanket statment might, technically, legally deprive them of it. Perhaps something like:


The Giant in the Playground Forum does not claim any ownership rights in the text, files, images, photos, video, sounds, musical works, works of authorship, or any other materials (collectively, "Content") that you post to the Homebrew Design (d20 and RPG) Section of Giant in the Playground Forum. After posting your Content to the Homebrew Design (d20 and RPG) Section of the Giant in the Playground Forum, you continue to retain all ownership rights in such Content, and you continue to have the right to use your Content in any way you choose within the limitations of these Terms of Service and the Forum Rules (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/announcement.php?a=1).

By displaying or publishing ("posting") any Content on or through the Giant in the Playground Forum, you hereby grant to The Giant in the Playground Forum and its moderators, special moderators, administrators, employees and any other individuals so designated by Giant in the Playground Forums, a limited license to use, modify, delete, publicly perform, publicly display, reproduce, and distribute such Content solely on and through The Giant in the Playground Forum.

Note: I'm not a lawyer. You should have a real one look at it. This is largley cribbed from other ToS around the net though so the draft might save some billing hours.

[Lord Herman]

Sounds like a good idea. I do little homebrewing here, but I'd hate for someone to steal my creations without permission.

[Renegade Paladin]

I'd be up for it. I don't post much homebrew, but I'd like my stories to stay mine, thanks.

[Vhaidara]

Amen to TPAM and TPATPAM. They should be open for use, but not for profit.

[Shhalahr Windrider]

Amen to TPAM and TPATPAM. They should be open for use, but not for profit.
TPAM?

TPATPAM?

[Vhaidara]

The Person Above Me and The Person Above The Person Above Me. Sorry, SMBG terms.

[Shhalahr Windrider]

The Person Above Me and The Person Above The Person Above Me. Sorry, SMBG terms.
'Kay. Good to know.

...Haven't done any SMBGs for some time now...

[Lord Herman]

This should be strictly restricted to homebrew, though. We wouldn't want people sueing Rich for using their 'ideas' (aka doing something they predicted).

[Damage Control]

That part of their ToS is so they don't get sued for using an idea that someone claims they thought of first. It says non-exclusive, meaning you can still do whatever you want with it. They're just protecting themselves. I doubt they're going to go in, take everything they want, and publish it together. WotC will not do it unless they are complete idiots, and The Giant isn't about to do it either.

As for other members, which there seems to be some concern about, I don't think you're giving up your rights to homebrew content by posting it. It's still your intellectual property.

I really think there's too much hype about this whole situation.

[Shhalahr Windrider]

That part of their ToS is so they don't get sued for using an idea that someone claims they thought of first. It says non-exclusive, meaning you can still do whatever you want with it. They're just protecting themselves. I doubt they're going to go in, take everything they want, and publish it together. WotC will not do it unless they are complete idiots, and The Giant isn't about to do it either.
Problem is, WotC, could do that if they wanted to, according to ToS. It's always been a classic "abuse of power" manuever to claim the power to do something outrageous and state you never intend to use it, only to go ahead and use it after the initial concerns have been allayed.

If they really just want to cover their butts in the case of R&D happening to come up with the same or similar ideas as board members on their own, isn't their a way of phrasing a protective clause that's less open to potential abuse?

[AKA_Bait]

This should be strictly restricted to homebrew, though. We wouldn't want people sueing Rich for using their 'ideas' (aka doing something they predicted).

I agree but the language I drafted above would protect him, I think. Humm... maybe not. I'll have to look at it again later when I have time. Humm... I think I can fix it just by adding in homebrew forums in a few places.... Really though, an actual lawyer, not just one by genetics, ought to look at the language.

Edit: There, that ought to restrict it to things posted to the Homebrew forum.



Problem is, WotC, could do that if they wanted to, according to ToS. It's always been a classic "abuse of power" manuever to claim the power to do something outrageous and state you never intend to use it, only to go ahead and use it after the initial concerns have been allayed.

If they really just want to cover their butts in the case of R&D happening to come up with the same or similar ideas as board members on their own, isn't their a way of phrasing a protective clause that's less open to potential abuse?

I should think so. Over the past few hours I've been thinking about it and there seem to have been several other reasonable options, such as requiring arbitration before a lawsuit is initiated in any case where a poster on their boards feels their intelectual property has been stolen by Wotc R&D.

Regardless, this thread is not for the debate about what WotC did. It's about for and against specific language in the ToS of THIS website. If we want to continue the back and forth about WotC we should do it here. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=54726&page=3)

[Tirian]

I know this forum has a Terms of Service that you agree to on signing up. Would it be possible to add a paragraph to the ToS stating that, "Any and all posts made are sole property of their respective posters," or somesuch? The recent furor on the WotC fora has made me a bit paranoiac about my creations.

The Berne Convention automatically and implicitly grants copyright to all creative work. A forum would have to go out of its way (as WOTC seems to believe that it has) to assert that the content of a post is no longer the intellectual property of the one who posted it; without such blatant speech, your work is already covered. And under no circumstance would a third party have the right to lift work.

If you personally wanted to slap a copyright notice onto your signature or paste it into every post that you specifically felt was deserving of protection, knock yourself out. (Check the web for the proper designation; honestly I can never remember how the formula goes.)

[Om]

A forum would have to go out of its way (as WOTC seems to believe that it has) to assert that the content of a post is no longer the intellectual property of the one who posted itMy thoughts exactly. The WotC boards apparently make such an explicit claim while, after a brief search, I can see no indication that GitP does so. If there is no such passage then there is no need for an amendment.

Incidentally, on forums where I've seen this issue arise before the advice has always been the same: if you plan to publish your work at any point then do not release it on the internet in any way shape or form. You are usually obliged to mention this to publishers and it is something that they are very wary of.

For those interested, the GitP terms that you agree to on registering are as follows. Note the lack of copyright claim.


Forum Rules

Registration to this forum is free! We do insist that you abide by the rules and policies detailed below. If you agree to the terms, please check the 'I agree' checkbox and press the 'Register' button below. If you would like to cancel the registration, click here to return to the forums index.

Although the administrators and moderators of Giant in the Playground Forums will attempt to keep all objectionable messages off this forum, it is impossible for us to review all messages. All messages express the views of the author, and neither the owners of Giant in the Playground Forums, nor Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (developers of vBulletin) will be held responsible for the content of any message.

By agreeing to these rules, you warrant that you will not post any messages that are obscene, vulgar, sexually-oriented, hateful, threatening, or otherwise violative of any laws.

The owners of Giant in the Playground Forums reserve the right to remove, edit, move or close any thread for any reason.

[Damage Control]

But it still IS your intellectual property. Once again, non-exclusive. They've had troubles with this in the past, such as the Magic staff not being allowed to go anywhere near the homebrew forums there.

Yes, they could have gone about this in a better way. Telling everyone, making the terms clear, etc. They didn't, and now everyone is furious.

And I'm sorry to have gone on about WotC in this thread, but that's why there is a problem in the first place. I especially think it's unnecessary here, because The Giant isn't about to steal someone's ideas, or get sued by someone for stealing their ideas. He isn't starting any new projects, and anything he feels well enough to work on for the gaming section, he is certainly gracious enough to remove/modify if someone feels that they've been stolen from.

[purple gelatinous cube o' Doom]

I would think unless your material is copyrighted, you can't do anything about it. Once you post it, seems to me that it would be public domain.

[Samiam303]

I would think unless your material is copyrighted, you can't do anything about it. Once you post it, seems to me that it would be public domain.
Nope. As Tirian already said:


The Berne Convention automatically and implicitly grants copyright to all creative work. A forum would have to go out of its way (as WOTC seems to believe that it has) to assert that the content of a post is no longer the intellectual property of the one who posted it; without such blatant speech, your work is already covered. And under no circumstance would a third party have the right to lift work.

If you personally wanted to slap a copyright notice onto your signature or paste it into every post that you specifically felt was deserving of protection, knock yourself out. (Check the web for the proper designation; honestly I can never remember how the formula goes.)
Read this here: The Berne Convention (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berne_Convention_for_the_Protection_of_Literary_an d_Artistic_Works). In short, simply by creating something, you own it. Unless, like in the case of WotC, you agree to FORFEIT your rights, you own what you post. Again, as someone already said, there's nothing in the T&C of this site that says you agree to waive any of your rights.
Basicly: Your homebrew is safe, folks.

[ArmorArmadillo]

I agree but the language I drafted above would protect him, I think. Humm... maybe not. I'll have to look at it again later when I have time. Humm... I think I can fix it just by adding in homebrew forums in a few places.... Really though, an actual lawyer, not just one by genetics, ought to look at the language.

Edit: There, that ought to restrict it to things posted to the Homebrew forum.



I should think so. Over the past few hours I've been thinking about it and there seem to have been several other reasonable options, such as requiring arbitration before a lawsuit is initiated in any case where a poster on their boards feels their intelectual property has been stolen by Wotc R&D.

Regardless, this thread is not for the debate about what WotC did. It's about for and against specific language in the ToS of THIS website. If we want to continue the back and forth about WotC we should do it here. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=54726&page=3)

They could do it; but not without seriously alienating the player base of a game which is entirely dependant on a supportive one.

[Zherog]

Yes, they could have gone about this in a better way. Telling everyone, making the terms clear, etc. They didn't, and now everyone is furious.

It's not "everyone." It's a vocal minority. I mean, aside from the absolute term of everyone (I'm not furious over it, which certainly makes your statement false), I can recall seeing about two dozen posters, tops, kvetching and moaning about the new ToU over there - even though the old ToU on their forums required you to actually surrender all rights to your IP.

[AKA_Bait]

The Giant isn't about to steal someone's ideas, or get sued by someone for stealing their ideas. He isn't starting any new projects, and anything he feels well enough to work on for the gaming section, he is certainly gracious enough to remove/modify if someone feels that they've been stolen from.

And I would certainly be the last person to accuse the Giant of such (WotC has a different history and is a different matter). The reason I'd prefer there be explicit language protecting homebrewers ideas on this forum is pretty well illustrated in the disagreement about who owns the intellectual property posted on a message board above.

This is, imho, the best site on the web for finding homebrewed stuff. As a DM, my campaigns would be a lot less interesting were it not for the forum here. I have tons of gratitude for the wonderful free creations I've been able to use courtesy of people like Fax Celestis, The Demented One, and The Vorpal Tribble. I want to make it as explicit as possible, right in the TOS, that homebrewers have absolutely nothing to fear by posting their material on this site.

If, as several posters above have said, there is no problem, then there is also no problem with adding some language making it explicit that is the case. I don't think the Giant ever would wrongfully make use of someone else's intellectual propert, but if it will ease the minds of the folks who have given me so many hours of gratis entertainment with their creations then I see no reason NOT to make the change in the TOS. Heck, I even drafted language that's posted above. If the forum wants, I can also have it reviewed by a lawyer free of charge (I'm not a lawyer but I work in a lawfirm and have several lawyer family members).

It really doesn't matter if you think WotC's language is acceptable. It doesn't matter of if you think that few enough people are annoyed by it to make it an issue. IT doesn't matter if you think that anyone foolish enough to post something they created for the world to see on a public forum deserves to lose it (although I probably think you are a schmuck).

What does matter is if you think that having a pile of talented homebrewers on these boards is worth adding a paragraph of language that will probably never matter to the TOS.

If you do, then there is no reason to argue against putting it there.

[Roland St. Jude]

What follows is not an official GitP statement, but is one moderator's reasoned opinion:

GitP makes no claims whatsoever about taking, giving, or affecting your IP rights in anyway. Neither the ToS or the Rules of Posting make any claims in that regard.

We do reserve the right to remove or edit content posted here...


The owners of Giant in the Playground Forums reserve the right to remove, edit, move or close any thread for any reason.

But we've made no claims about ownership, usage, etc. If what you've posted here is yours, then it's yours. If you've nicked it from someone else, well, then it's not yours. But it's certainly not ours, and we've laid no claim on it - except that if it violates our ToS or Rules of Posting or we otherwise don't want it here, we're removing it.

I suspect that we are unlikely to add language: 1) disclaiming rights to your IP; 2) creating a situation where we've offered to protect or recognize your rights just because you posted something; 3) creating complicated licensure relationships; or 4) otherwise muddying the waters. There are good reasons not to add verbiage that may create unintended relationships and obligations. Especially when that language is solely for the purpose of explicitly not claiming what we're already plainly not claiming.

That'd be my two cents. What WotC's ToS/ToU claims may or may not be an outrage and may or may not be a threat to the homebrew community. We don't do that here. And as others have said, it's quite possible that we have the best homebrew community going.

[Icewalker]

So if I understand what the legal situation is, it's that the GitP forums have no "you post it we get it" (of course!) although WotC does, and so the normal "I came up with it first so it's mine and you can't sell it" rules apply for us here, even though we put it online on a public forum.

[Pepper]

What if one of the posters on this forum decided to sue Ritch (The Giant) for copyright infringement over things they posted in his homebrew section ?

It would seem to me that Ritch would be better served with a rule much like wizards. Or that people should refrain from posting the content in full on this site, and instead link to their own site where the material can be clearly copyrighted.

[AKA_Bait]

What if one of the posters on this forum decided to sue Ritch (The Giant) for copyright infringement over things they posted in his homebrew section ?


Frankly, one could do that now. They would, in fact, have a better case now than if there was some specific langauge, I think. "We left it vague on purpose" is rarely an acceptable legal defense. That said, I doubt seriously that this would be an issue. Rich, nor anyone associated with GitP Games, is going to steal anyone's idea.


It would seem to me that Ritch would be better served with a rule much like wizards. Or that people should refrain from posting the content in full on this site, and instead link to their own site where the material can be clearly copyrighted.

And that might very well spell the death of the homebrew forum. I don't think anyone wants that. Also, having homebrewers post on their own site with a link on this forum wouldn't totally shield GitP Games anyway. They could always claim someone from GitP clicked through and then stole it. In that case, GitP would have even less protection than some language that allowed it limited use through the website but stated it was already the intellectual property of the poster.


So if I understand what the legal situation is, it's that the GitP forums have no "you post it we get it" (of course!) although WotC does, and so the normal "I came up with it first so it's mine and you can't sell it" rules apply for us here, even though we put it online on a public forum.

The debate about the WotC langauge is on the other thread. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=54726&page=3) On here, there is no official legal stance. Roland's post above is specifically his opinion, not an official statement (otherwise, since he's a mod as well as an intellegent person, I would have just shut up about it by now). Given the lack of language, I would assume the default, that it remains the posters IP, just as Keith Baker retains rights to say, The Gleaner, even though it's posted on a website for the world to see (btw thanks Keith!).

[Zherog]

just as Keith Baker retains rights to say, The Gleaner, even though it's posted on a website for the world to see (btw thanks Keith!).

That's perhaps a poor example, because the copyright notice on the bottom of the page specifically tells you Keith is the copyright holder. The same is true for the stuff Amber has on the site. Er, that is... Amber's stuff mentions she's the copyright holder, not that Keith is.

[Samiam303]

Frankly, one could do that now. They would, in fact, have a better case now than if there was some specific langauge, I think. "We left it vague on purpose" is rarely an acceptable legal defense. That said, I doubt seriously that this would be an issue. Rich, nor anyone associated with GitP Games, is going to steal anyone's idea.
Yeah... I don't know why you guys are perpetuating this. I'll say AGAIN: unless you agree to anything saying you waive your rights, YOU OWN WHAT YOU POST ALREADY. They don't need to add that to the T&C, you just own it by creating it. As soon as you post it, you have the copyright to it.

[Om]

Frankly, one could do that now. They would, in fact, have a better case now than if there was some specific langauge, I think. "We left it vague on purpose" is rarely an acceptable legal defense.How is it vague? GitP does not claim any rights over your homebrew content. There is absolutely nothing ambiguous about that.

[mudbunny]

The Berne Convention automatically and implicitly grants copyright to all creative work. A forum would have to go out of its way (as WOTC seems to believe that it has) to assert that the content of a post is no longer the intellectual property of the one who posted it; without such blatant speech, your work is already covered. And under no circumstance would a third party have the right to lift work.


My thoughts exactly. The WotC boards apparently make such an explicit claim while, after a brief search, I can see no indication that GitP does so. If there is no such passage then there is no need for an amendment.


In short, simply by creating something, you own it. Unless, like in the case of WotC, you agree to FORFEIT your rights, you own what you post. Again, as someone already said, there's nothing in the T&C of this site that says you agree to waive any of your rights.
Basicly: Your homebrew is safe, folks.

Sigh. I didn't want to post in this thread, but I want to dispel the FUD about the WotC ToU.

It in no way removes your intellectual property rights, as even a cursory reading would show.

Intellectual property rights (IP rights) are exclusive. What that means is that they exclude from others the rights to use your IP without your written permission. In the case of the WotC ToU, by posting it their, what you are doing is giving them the right to use your material how they see fit. It makes no restrictions, nor, legally, can they without a signed and notarized legal document, on what you can do with your material. It in fact allows WotC to do things to your posts that are required for a message board to function.

In the case of copyrighted material, that includes things like copying it, moving it to another medium, or altering it or creating derivative works of it. The WotC do that every day with your work:

Copying it - Making backups on their servers
Moving it to another medium - Backing it up to a tape-drive, or a ginormous HD
Altering it - A post you write getting modded
Creating derivative works - Allowing others to quote your works.

[StickMan]

If Giant in the Playground rips my work I'm going to go and prep for the end of the world. It ain't going to happen if I trust one publisher in the world its the Giant.

Just my vote of confidence

Stickman

[Miles Invictus]

The clause is great for your average homebrewer, who produces a small body of work and would be thrilled to see it adapted for official use. It makes it less likely that WotC will be sued if its products are similar to homebrewed submissions, which makes them more willing to read and use homebrew material. This is good for WotC and the casual homebrewer.

It screws high-end homebrewers like Fax and Tribble, though, who probably have a book's worth of material already. Although...I'm not sure if they could actually get away with outright plagiarizing so much stuff from one source -- the terms apply to a forum, not an idea submission website, so it's less clear that the poster intended to give away his intellectual property.

That's how I understand it, of course. Any actual lawyers want to weigh in on this?

Actually, it'd be great if I could get answers to a few other legal questions, too...

Let's say that I homebrew a book's worth of stuff, upload it to a PDF on my website, and then link to it on the WotC forum. Have I licensed them to use my stuff? I haven't actually posted the material on their site, I've simply provided a link. What if I get someone else to link to it? What if someone links to it without my prompting? Under what circumstances does WotC actually get to use my work?

[Zherog]

If you have legal questions about a contract you've signed, you should speak to a lawyer.

[Miles Invictus]

Wouldn't it be more prudent to ask a lawyer before signing the contract? :smallsmile:

[Shhalahr Windrider]

Wouldn't it be more prudent to ask a lawyer before signing the contract? :smallsmile:
Would be nice if we could avoid having to do that every time we join a new online forum, though.:smallfrown:

[Zherog]

Wouldn't it be more prudent to ask a lawyer before signing the contract? :smallsmile:

Indeed. Infinitely better. But if you've agreed to the terms of use, it's too late for that and you're stuck with seeing the lawyer after-the-fact. :smallwink:

[RandomNPC]

well i've said it somewhere on the fourms before, but here goes.

i'm not a lawer. large blanket contracts, like terms of service agreements that you have to agree to with no chance to negotiate the terms of the agreement on or you get nothing, have been losing the fights when it comes to the courts. the one i remember best from the news reported that the judge said there was never a chance for the individual to negotiate terms of service and had to agree to the general TOS or get no service from the corperation.

i wish i could be more help but i don't remember the corp. that lost the battle.

also, my bit of homebrew stuf, if you use it, use it with a smile. if you mass produce it and get decent money*, give me a slice of the proffit.

*decent money accounts to being able to quit your day job. maybe not actually quitting, but being able to.