[CWBP2] Question Regarding Ownership

[Falconius]

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]

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.

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.

[Azélor]

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.

[Jalyha]

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

[Redrobes]

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.

[Jalyha]

... 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.

^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.

[Falconius]

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.

[12rounds]

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]

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]

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.