MapTool 1.3 status (as of b54)

Progress reports and musings from the developers on the current gaming tools.

Moderators: dorpond, trevor, Azhrei

User avatar
zEal
Dragon
Posts: 944
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 2:25 am

Re: MapTool 1.3 status (as of b54)

Post by zEal »

Cweord wrote:Catalyst, it relates to the RPG rules system, not the computer game - 2 very seperate entitys.

And I have a fairly direct in to ask the question - I'm a catalyst play tester.
Microsoft owns the license to the Shadowrun IP when it comes to software... I'm pretty sure a macro framework would fall under 'software'.

Cweord
Great Wyrm
Posts: 1343
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 10:49 am
Location: Midsomer Norton, (Near Bath), UK
Contact:

Re: MapTool 1.3 status (as of b54)

Post by Cweord »

I'll check with the guys at Catalyst just in case - if they say MS, I'll contact MS. I think I have an in with their games dept, via my mother in law . . . . If not, it's someone close enough who can get me the right email
Cweord

This message has been spell checked by Freudcheck - any mistakes are purley a figment of your imagination.
-------
My Tokens Directory
http://gallery.rptools.net/v/contrib/Cw ... er_Tokens/

User avatar
zEal
Dragon
Posts: 944
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 2:25 am

Re: MapTool 1.3 status (as of b54)

Post by zEal »

Good luck with that. I think you'd be better off not asking and staying below the radar, lest your framework suffer the fate of Shadowrun Online. :(

User avatar
Veggiesama
Dragon
Posts: 619
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2007 1:18 am

Re: MapTool 1.3 status (as of b54)

Post by Veggiesama »

Cweord wrote:I'll check with the guys at Catalyst just in case - if they say MS, I'll contact MS. I think I have an in with their games dept, via my mother in law . . . . If not, it's someone close enough who can get me the right email
I'm with zEal on this. Screw 'em.

MS has done nothing but harm to the Shadowrun brand name. Catalyst, on the other hand, can do nothing but benefit from virtual tabletops: a more accessible game means more people playing at no cost to them.

This is all very obvious to everyone here, but I'm not so sure a Microsoft/Catalyst lawyer would see it the same way.

Things to keep in mind:
1. You are not profiting in any way from this (nor are the MapTool devs).
2. You are not making the game "play itself". You still need the rulebook for character creation, knowing how complex rules interact, getting the flavor of the world, etc.
3. AFAIK, individual game mechanics cannot be copyrighted (to be fair, I don't think there are clear legal precedents for this yet, but that seems to be the trend). Writing a program that rolls a bunch of d6s (a number determined from some kind of database), adds up everything that's 5 or higher, and then slaps a "My hacking skill check" label on it is not something you can be sued for. (here's a UK court decision that's kinda interesting to read about, somewhat applicable).

In other words, I think you only stand to be harmed by asking permission (after all, you could get written permission and simply have it revoked years down the road), but that's because I'm incredibly paranoid and distrustful of so-called intellectual property rights.

EDIT: The worst that could happen is you get a cease-and-desist, in which case you take down the public links and re-release it on BitTorrent under a pseudonym. Viva la revolucion!
My D&D 4e Campaign FrameworkMy Shadowrun 4e Campaign Framework
RPGA#: 5223846427 — Skype: Veggiesama — Fear the ferret.

User avatar
Rumble
Deity
Posts: 6235
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 7:48 pm

Re: MapTool 1.3 status (as of b54)

Post by Rumble »

I am not a lawyer, so this could be just plain inaccurate, but I think Veggiesama has a point about this (although lack of profit is, I believe, irrelevant in copyright issues - AFAIK, it may help you in your defense but it is not a defense in and of itself).

Anyway, if I understand properly, RPG mechanics (being a procedure or algorithm by which a certain result is determined) could potentially be patented, but one cannot copyright the idea of rolling 1d20 and adding various numbers to it. How the mechanic is expressed is a different matter entirely, and said expression can be copyrighted.

On the other hand, distributing a framework for 4th Edition D&D, say, that includes the published text of the powers, magic items, and so forth is flirting pretty heavily with danger, since that published text is expression of the idea. I avoid that somewhat by making people enter all their power info themselves, but even that may not be sufficient, legally.

User avatar
God Returns
Cave Troll
Posts: 76
Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2009 3:04 am
Location: Western Massachusetts

Re: MapTool 1.3 status (as of b54)

Post by God Returns »

Pardon my butting in on your conversation, guys, but aren't almost all pen and paper RPG mechanics open to the public under GNU/GPL? As far as I understand, the words written in an RPG source are not copywritten material so much as the book itself (like any other book). And besides, no company has ever brought lawsuit against third-party companies that created supplemental material for their product. Players have developed unsanctioned supplemental programs (dice rollers, deck of many things generators, etc) and distributed them via the net under GNU/GPL and never heard complaints.

This is just my understanding of how things work, though. So, if you choose to play on the safer side and ask permission of a company known to destroy good things, then godspeed and good luck.

User avatar
toyrobots
Dragon
Posts: 278
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2008 4:17 pm

Re: MapTool 1.3 status (as of b54)

Post by toyrobots »

If maptool or a maptool user starts catching hell for people using it to play proprietary RPGs like Shadowrun, I will shoot myself because the world has become too stupid to live in.

User avatar
Rumble
Deity
Posts: 6235
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 7:48 pm

Re: MapTool 1.3 status (as of b54)

Post by Rumble »

God Returns wrote:Pardon my butting in on your conversation, guys, but aren't almost all pen and paper RPG mechanics open to the public under GNU/GPL? As far as I understand, the words written in an RPG source are not copywritten material so much as the book itself (like any other book). And besides, no company has ever brought lawsuit against third-party companies that created supplemental material for their product. Players have developed unsanctioned supplemental programs (dice rollers, deck of many things generators, etc) and distributed them via the net under GNU/GPL and never heard complaints.

This is just my understanding of how things work, though. So, if you choose to play on the safer side and ask permission of a company known to destroy good things, then godspeed and good luck.
The GNU/GPL has no impact on copyright status unless the publisher of the game chooses to release their work under the GPL. In general, I think Creative Commons licenses are used more frequently for written works, but regardless, unless the author/owner specifically says "this is GPL" or "this is Public Domain" or they use some other license, then the author has full control of all rights to the work.

Basically, as soon as a particular expression of an idea (that is, not the idea, like rolling a 20-sided die and adding a number to it, but the words used to explain it) are put down in a reasonably permanent form, the writer has copyright to that expression. Copyright accrues to the actual words written in the book - it is the specific expression that is protected, not the idea it explains (ignoring for the moment things like derivative works and such).

Mechanics - the mathematical procedure - are not copyright-eligible, AFAIK, but they could possibly be patent-eligible.

User avatar
Veggiesama
Dragon
Posts: 619
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2007 1:18 am

Re: MapTool 1.3 status (as of b54)

Post by Veggiesama »

Found some more precedents. The law is so much fun!

http://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/copy ... ments.html
My D&D 4e Campaign FrameworkMy Shadowrun 4e Campaign Framework
RPGA#: 5223846427 — Skype: Veggiesama — Fear the ferret.

User avatar
palmer
Great Wyrm
Posts: 1367
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: MapTool 1.3 status (as of b54)

Post by palmer »

The safest approach, hands down, is to say nothing and stay under the radar.

Prety much universally, RPG companies internet policies forbid, variously, "automation of the rules" or "computer code".

Steve Jackson Games explicitly says that anything more than a basic chatroom and "character creation game aid" is in violation of their Online Policy.
http://www.sjgames.com/general/online_policy.html

Palladium Games forbids any "computer code" which is what macros are, or "mass distribution" which a publicly available download can be considered.
http://www.palladiumbooks.com/policies.html

So on and so forth. A perfect example is Heroscape, a miniatures game.
Someone was developing an emulator to play it online.
He contacted the company for permission to distribute. They shut him down.
They would have been oblivious to it if he had not spoken up.
http://heroscapers.com/community/showth ... 258&page=5

Cweord
Great Wyrm
Posts: 1343
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 10:49 am
Location: Midsomer Norton, (Near Bath), UK
Contact:

Re: MapTool 1.3 status (as of b54)

Post by Cweord »

Catalyst activllly give links on their site to some character generators, and I need to be careful with not saying too much, as I don't want to mess up being on the playtesting team.

I think this falls is a VERY grey area - as your not creating an online game (i.e. microsofts licence) but automating the ruleset (catalyst Licence). As you would still need the books, a GM and are just writing macros for generic peice of software it shouldn't interfear with the MS IP in any way.

Unfortunatly Shadowrun Online as being written as a computer game, and one that could end up in direct opposition to the Microsoft IP.

I may keep quiet from MS, but definatly need to talk to the catalyst crowd.
Cweord

This message has been spell checked by Freudcheck - any mistakes are purley a figment of your imagination.
-------
My Tokens Directory
http://gallery.rptools.net/v/contrib/Cw ... er_Tokens/

User avatar
Brigand
Read-only User
Posts: 1623
Joined: Thu Feb 14, 2008 8:57 am
Location: Nosy GM's can go frak themselves!

Re: MapTool 1.3 status (as of b54)

Post by Brigand »

Rules and game mechanics cannot be copyrighted. You can automate all the game mechanics you want as long as you change the IP so it's different from the actual protected parts of the rule books. Aka, the fluff and how the rules are described. WotC cannot sue you for writing a program that rolls 1d20+x and compares it to A, B, C, &/or D.

Which is why all those 4th edition frameworks that spit out the full power are violating copyright laws and one of the reasons I don't use them. The other reason being they're just darned ugly both in the code and the output.

User avatar
Micco
Giant
Posts: 148
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 10:21 pm

Re: MapTool 1.3 status (as of b54)

Post by Micco »

IANAL.

That being stated, typically if you are only automating the rules and not describing them, it won't be an issue. Ask yourself, "will this reasonably allow someone to play SR without them having purchased the SR game materials and sourcebooks?" If the answer is "no", then at least ethically you are fine. As to legally...well, if the law used common sense then lawyers would be out of a job!

I agree with the other posters. Best just to try to stay ethically correct and don't involve the lawyers. When asked, they almost have to tell you 'no'. But they'll happily ignore non-harmful violations as long as they can claim they weren't aware of your work if they are ever accused of abandoning the copyright through non-enforcement.

User avatar
Jector
Great Wyrm
Posts: 1164
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 9:19 pm
Location: Atlanta

Re: MapTool 1.3 status (as of b54)

Post by Jector »

Micco wrote: I agree with the other posters. Best just to try to stay ethically correct and don't involve the lawyers. When asked, they almost have to tell you 'no'. But they'll happily ignore non-harmful violations as long as they can claim they weren't aware of your work if they are ever accused of abandoning the copyright through non-enforcement.
I'd say this is very likely. If you don't hit them in the wallet, they're not going to give a flock. If you ask for permission to use something, they'll say no in case you develop something in the future that may hit them in the wallet and have permission to do so.

And since none of this is profitable, the likelihood of them doing anything other than a cease-and-desist is vanishingly small. Bad press and nothing to show for it.
I cast firecube! ~4E

User avatar
biodude
Dragon
Posts: 444
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2008 2:40 pm
Location: Montréal, QC

Re: MapTool 1.3 status (as of b54)

Post by biodude »

thecyberwolfe wrote:As another non-coder, one of the main reasons I haven't figured out the macro system is because the darn thing keeps changing! I keep putting off learning how to do macros because it seems like every other build some shiny new stuff gets added which changes how everything is done again.
That's why I'm still using 1.3b47. I'm waiting for 1.3 to stabilize before I update all my macros. I totally support stabilizing 1.3 and then allow all the new features waiting in the wings.

On that note, it also occurred to me that there are several aspects of the MapTool "aggregate program", such as the graphical map, macros, movement, lighting, (scripting eventually), etc. Would it be possible to restrict contributions in one area for a particular build, fix some bugs, then add new material in another area? The main reason I suggest this is to avoid the problem of "I really want to use new feature X, but bugs in feature Y are prohibitive". I'm not a contributor, so I have no idea how feasible this is - just a thought.
"The trouble with communicating is believing you have achieved it"
[ d20 StatBlock Importer ] [ Batch Edit Macros ] [ Canned Speech UI ] [ Lib: Math ]

Post Reply

Return to “Developer Notes”