Game Images Copyrights & Magic: The Gathering

[LordAshes]

With a tool like MapTools the issue of image copyright can be a heated debate...

Theoretially most images, including the such things as maps and creature images, in roleplaying modules are copyright. So when is it okay to use these images within MapTools and when it is not? I am sure if you ask 10 different people, you will probably get 10 different answers.

In my personal opinion (and that is all it is...my opinion...without any basis on actual laws) is that if the act of using the copyright images hinders the original author then it is not legal. If the original author is in no way adversly affected then go ahead.

For example, if I bought a roleplaying module and used some of the pictures in it for my own session then it is, in my opinion, legal because the author has been paid for his work and I could just as easily be sharing the picture, with my group, over a webcam. However, if I passed thoses images on to other people (outside the roleplaying sesison group) who have not bought the module then I would be depriving the author of potential income (because, without my intervention, those other people may have bought the module), so that would not be legit.

I use the same approach when dealing with card games. If a card game (such as Magic The Gathering) requires both players to have cards, then two or more players should be able to play such a game over MapTools as long as they each own the necessary cards. If a card game requires only one of multiple players to own the cards (e.g. UNO, Munchkin, etc) then players should able to enjoy the game, through MapTools, as long as one of the players owns the original card game cards.

To this end, for all you Magic The Gathering players, I have written a program that gets Magic The Garthering card images directly from the Gatherer (Wizards Of The Coast) website. These can then be drawn into MapTools as tokens and with an appropriate framework (like the one I am currently working on) you can play Magic The Gathering.

Since I don't know which Magic cards each user owns, the program is designed to take a text file of card names and download the cards's corresponding image. Obviously one could explot this to use cards that they don't own but that would definitly be a copyright infringement.

The programmer will not be held responsible for any illegal use of this program by anyone who abuses the intended use of this program.

The program can be downloade at:

http://www.mediafire.com/?is83381y64n3c

It is very easy to use. Unzip it, install it and then use the following steps:

1. Place a text file in the root of any drive (e.g. USB stick) and call it "Deck.Txt"
2. The text file should list all the cards that the player owns (one entry per line)
3. Start the application
4. Select the drive
5. Press the "Get Cards"
6. The card images will be written to the same drive that the "Deck.txt" file was on.

If any titles don't match, a warning will appear (sometimes listing possible names) and the process will halt. Fix the "Deck.txt" file and retry.

[aliasmask]

My rule of thumb is, if you have to ask, then it's not. But neither is J-walking. I recommend not reprinting commercial items. It's the redistribution that gets you in to trouble. Same with music, you download all the illegal files you want, just don't share them. But that's only the case if you don't take extraordinary measures to gain access to that data.

There's also the idea of taking someone else's work and making it your own. At what point can you claim creative credit. If I recall, there has to be 3 major changes to the work before you can make that claim. But even so, it doesn't mean the original author can't sue for damages. From what I've seen, if the original author sees the work they'll ask for it to be removed and if they can claim damages from your sharing, then you're in trouble.

But I'm no lawyer. I downloaded a card deck of tarot cards where the quality was horrible and so I cleaned them up and redid some graphics. I asked the author if I could share my deck of many things. He had no problem with the individual pictures, but he sold the collection to another company, so if the images are presented as a collection, then I can't. I still have the images and have yet to build the actual MT functionality. I would still use it, but only for a game that I run. Technically, the deck is only a small part of the collection, so technically it's not "the" collection. But still, I wouldn't share it with the public afraid of reprisal. I wouldn't want to get the MT people in trouble either by saving it on their servers.

[LordAshes]

My rule of thumb is, if you have to ask, then it's not. But neither is J-walking. I recommend not reprinting commercial items. It's the redistribution that gets you in to trouble. Same with music, you download all the illegal files you want, just don't share them. But that's only the case if you don't take extraordinary measures to gain access to that data.

For the most part I agree...however, sometimes there are others who should have the right to enjoy the images but can't because it takes too much time to generate them. For example, scanning in all the cards for a basic Munchkin game would take a while (on the order of 160 cards) but I know people who own originals of the card game that would love to play it with others online. I mean I could, completely legally, take my physical card game set and play with others over web cams (using a 3rd party to make the moves for each player) but using MapTools is much easier. Plus, since playing the physical card game requires only one player to own the set (i.e. a multiplayer game can be played with one set), by playing online with others you may actually be doing the author a favor because you can introduce them to the game. Last time my friend was over any played the new Munchkin Boardgame, he liked it so much that he went out and bought it.

There's also the idea of taking someone else's work and making it your own. At what point can you claim creative credit. If I recall, there has to be 3 major changes to the work before you can make that claim. But even so, it doesn't mean the original author can't sue for damages. From what I've seen, if the original author sees the work they'll ask for it to be removed and if they can claim damages from your sharing, then you're in trouble.

I, myself, would not do that...I am a card game supported (over 100 physical unique card games in my collection) so my intention of duplicating games in MapTools is just for the pleasure of being able to play the games more frequently with busys that are not in town.

But I'm no lawyer. I downloaded a card deck of tarot cards where the quality was horrible and so I cleaned them up and redid some graphics. I asked the author if I could share my deck of many things. He had no problem with the individual pictures, but he sold the collection to another company, so if the images are presented as a collection, then I can't. I still have the images and have yet to build the actual MT functionality. I would still use it, but only for a game that I run. Technically, the deck is only a small part of the collection, so technically it's not "the" collection. But still, I wouldn't share it with the public afraid of reprisal. I wouldn't want to get the MT people in trouble either by saving it on their servers.

Agreed. I am probably going to end up MapTooling a lot of my card game collection but only for my own purpose to play with my friends. For other card game collectors who are really interested in MapTool version, I might be willing to share if they send me proof that they own the original physical card game.

[LordAshes]

BTW, for those interested in the posted program...

The program requires an internet connection because all it does is go to:

http://gatherer.wizards.com

submit a query for the card name, gets the resulting CardID, and downloads the corresponding card image using:

http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Im ... &type=card

All of this information can easily be obtained at the Gatherer website with no need to do any hacking. If you look at any card on the website, you can easily see the properties of the card image to get the above image link. The only trick is knowing the card id for the desired card. This is what the program automates. It submist a Name Search for each card in the deck to the Gatherer website, parses the result for the card id and then downloads the card image. You can actually do the same by submitting the card name on the website and then using the Save Picture As option.

The search in the program is kind of a little odd because it just uses the website search. It works as follows:

1. If the name search criteria is specific enough to narrow the search down to one card then the search returns that card (e.g. Aladdin Ring). Note that the name does not need to be exact (e.g. Aladdin Ring instead of Alladin's Ring) but the criteria must match only one card.

2. If the name search criteria returns multiple cards then the search tries to find an exact match. For example, the search "Swamp" will find about 5 different Swamp cards including the actual (Basic Land) "Swamp" but also other cards such as "Leechfilled Swamp" and so on. In such a case all the results are compared to the search criteria to see if one maches the name exactly. Thus searching for Swamp will return 5 or so results but then the (Basic Land) "Swamp" card will be chosen because the name matches exactly.

3. If the name search criteria results in multiple cards and there is no exact name match then an error is displayed and any matched cards will be displayed as possibilities. The program will terminated after this. Correct the name in the Deck file and try again. For example, searching for "Swam" will find the 5 previously noted "Swamp" cards (plus maybe some other cards with "Swam" in the name). However, since none of these cards will actually match the exact name "Swam", an error will be returned.

For those more enterprizing, the website actually contains all the infromation about each card. Thus it is possible, for example, to create a program that will create tokens which have an enlarged version of the casting cost or the power/toughness so that it is more easily visible even on the token view (without having to look at the portrait view).

[Azhrei]

I've posted on this topic before; search the forum and I'm sure you'll find it.

Within the U.S., copyright now automatically extends to anything you produce. Because corporations are legal entities under the law, they can also own the copyright to something. (Which is completely bogus, but it is what it is.)

The goal of copyright was originally to allow the author to control how and where their product was used. It was primarily for books (such as the creator's almanac), lithographs, and sheet music. Later it was applied to gramophone recordings, and much later to moving pictures (movies).

If your use of the image prevents the author from controlling how and where the product is used, then it likely violates the copyright. The largest exemption in the copyright code -- and the most contentious one -- is the "fair use" policy. This allows for exceptions "such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research." (The link goes to copyright.gov.)

Some of those exceptions could be pretty large. For the purposes of playing a game, "teaching" might be the most appropriate. Role-playing games have been used to teach people many different things over the years and are used quite extensively in sociological/psychological studies regarding society as a whole, although that probably comes under the heading of "research".

Read the linked to article for an overview. The end result is that most gaming materials are covered by fair use for your own gaming group, but not for distribution beyond such group.

[LordAshes]

I've posted on this topic before; search the forum and I'm sure you'll find it.

Within the U.S., copyright now automatically extends to anything you produce. Because corporations are legal entities under the law, they can also own the copyright to something. (Which is completely bogus, but it is what it is.)

The goal of copyright was originally to allow the author to control how and where their product was used. It was primarily for books (such as the creator's almanac), lithographs, and sheet music. Later it was applied to gramophone recordings, and much later to moving pictures (movies).

If your use of the image prevents the author from controlling how and where the product is used, then it likely violates the copyright. The largest exemption in the copyright code -- and the most contentious one -- is the "fair use" policy. This allows for exceptions "such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research." (The link goes to copyright.gov.)

Some of those exceptions could be pretty large. For the purposes of playing a game, "teaching" might be the most appropriate. Role-playing games have been used to teach people many different things over the years and are used quite extensively in sociological/psychological studies regarding society as a whole, although that probably comes under the heading of "research".

Read the linked to article for an overview. The end result is that most gaming materials are covered by fair use for your own gaming group, but not for distribution beyond such group.

Thanks for the info.

The distribution component is the one that I think needs careful definition. For example, if I buy a Roleplaying Module and turn all the maps and images into MapTools for my own session use then it is "fair use" unless the author is also selling the contents in a digital format in which case I would need to purchase the digital content version. Let us say that the author isn't so converting it to digital and using it for my own session should be "fair use". Now, most would say that "distribution" of the resulting images would no longer constitute "fair use" but what if I distributued the images (for free) only to other users that have also purchased the physical Roleplaying Module? In such a case "distribution" should be legit because (as you said) you are not preventing the author from controlling how and where the product is used (the author already sold the physical version of the Roleplaying Module to the other users).

Also the opposite is true, you need to define "teach" very carefully otherwise any teaching tools (software encyclopedia, software documentaries, and almost any game) would all be "fair use".

This is why I use the "moral compass" approach mentioned earlier in this post. It may not actually be 100% consistent with Copyright laws but I figure if you don't do anything to screw over the author then it is unlikely that the author will file a copyright lawsuit against you.

It also appears (this is concluded from observation and not actually consulting the copyright laws) that it is not the act of copying that is illegal, it is what you do with it that matters...otherwise all the internet browser companies would be sued. When browsing webpages, internet browsers commonly copy images to the computer cache for faster retrival on subsequent visits. This includes copyright images. Thus if I create an original piece of art and place it on my website for viewing, even though it may be copyright there may be many copies of it on many different computers (i.e. the computers of visitors that have visited my website). As such the act of actually copying the image does not seem to be illegal. It is using the image for other purposes (other than the author intended) which seems to be the illegal part. Following this logic, re-inforces the idea that if you buy a physical game you can digitize it for use with MapTools as long as you use it for your self (i.e. the author who sold you the physical game intended for you to be able to play it). Distributing the digital version to others who do not own the physical game would be illegal since the author's intentions are not being followed (i.e. the author wants only players who bought the game to be able to play it). Continuing with this logic, it should be legit to distribiute the digital version to those that also own the physical copy because, once again, the author's intentions would be met.

[jfrazierjr]

It also appears (this is concluded from observation and not actually consulting the copyright laws) that it is not the act of copying that is illegal, it is what you do with it that matters...otherwise all the internet browser companies would be sued. When browsing webpages, internet browsers commonly copy images to the computer cache for faster retrival on subsequent visits. This includes copyright images. Thus if I create an original piece of art and place it on my website for viewing, even though it may be copyright there may be many copies of it on many different computers (i.e. the computers of visitors that have visited my website).

Except that in this case, the original author has a standardized means to prevent such automatic caching of the contents of their pages via proper configuration of their website such that all browsers know not to cache said contents. Of course, this then puts the onus on the author to "enforce" his copyright "rights" as opposed to the other way around. But, as I say, it is possible to control the caching or not of your content in a browser's local cache store on a users computer.

[LordAshes]

It also appears (this is concluded from observation and not actually consulting the copyright laws) that it is not the act of copying that is illegal, it is what you do with it that matters...otherwise all the internet browser companies would be sued. When browsing webpages, internet browsers commonly copy images to the computer cache for faster retrival on subsequent visits. This includes copyright images. Thus if I create an original piece of art and place it on my website for viewing, even though it may be copyright there may be many copies of it on many different computers (i.e. the computers of visitors that have visited my website).

Except that in this case, the original author has a standardized means to prevent such automatic caching of the contents of their pages via proper configuration of their website such that all browsers know not to cache said contents. Of course, this then puts the onus on the author to "enforce" his copyright "rights" as opposed to the other way around. But, as I say, it is possible to control the caching or not of your content in a browser's local cache store on a users computer.

I only partially agree. Most browsers only implement a sub-set of features (hence the problems with wbepages that are fully cross-platform compatible) and although probably all the major browsers support cache related instructions, I doubt that writing web browser which does not implement cache related instructions is illegal.

[drow]

Theoretially most images, including the such things as maps and creature images, in roleplaying modules are copyright.

not theory. unless something is explicitly released to the public domain, it is subject to copyright law by default.

I am sure if you ask 10 different people, you will probably get 10 different answers.

undoubtedly, but at least nine of them are going to be wrong.

[Flax]

The copyright does include all images on cards and modules, even for rather innocent uses such as gaming. This is likely not covered by fair use guidelines, which seem to have been paraphrased rather glibly and out of context. You are basically only allowed to use a small portion of the work for fair use, not the entire thing. Every piece of material in the book for players is not small, but the entire work filtered for a specific audience.

However- gaming companies are not stupid. I have personally gotten explicit permission from several of them for just such a reason as you are mentioning. They do realize the fact that running an electronic game across the globe is a very good idea, and if you limit it to sharing just as if you would share if you were in the same room, most (I would say all, but sweeping inclusion is always a bad idea) would be more than happy you have chosen their game instead of someone else's. Note my permissions focused on role playing modules, not card games- the card games are a different breed entirely, in that the images themselves *Are* the whole game.

I have misplaced my permission from WotC (and am waiting for confirmation again), but have had it from TSR (granted, this was ancient history and nothing then, was comparable to what you can share today), and currently have it from Steve Jackson Games (of GURPS system publishing).

[LordAshes]

The copyright does include all images on cards and modules, even for rather innocent uses such as gaming. This is likely not covered by fair use guidelines, which seem to have been paraphrased rather glibly and out of context. You are basically only allowed to use a small portion of the work for fair use, not the entire thing. Every piece of material in the book for players is not small, but the entire work filtered for a specific audience.

However- gaming companies are not stupid. I have personally gotten explicit permission from several of them for just such a reason as you are mentioning. They do realize the fact that running an electronic game across the globe is a very good idea, and if you limit it to sharing just as if you would share if you were in the same room, most (I would say all, but sweeping inclusion is always a bad idea) would be more than happy you have chosen their game instead of someone else's. Note my permissions focused on role playing modules, not card games- the card games are a different breed entirely, in that the images themselves *Are* the whole game.

I have misplaced my permission from WotC (and am waiting for confirmation again), but have had it from TSR (granted, this was ancient history and nothing then, was comparable to what you can share today), and currently have it from Steve Jackson Games (of GURPS system publishing).

Cool. How did you go about getting that? Just sent an e-mail? I would love to try to get permission from SJ for Munchkin.

[LordAshes]

Going back to the copyright scenario...just playing devil's advocate for a little while...

I posted a url to Wizard's Of The Coast official Magic The Gathering website. There you can use their database to look up any (or almost any) card, see the specs and the card image.

Obviously going to this website and looking at the cards is legal since WotC designed it.

Now what if I link directly to the card image to look up the same infromation? Is that legal or illegal?

Now what if I opened up a browser that supports multiple pages and looked up multiple cards at once? Is that legal or illegal?

Now I use a browser that can cascade the pages show that I can view the multiple cards at once? Is that legal or illegal?

Now I implement a custom browser that does the same as above but allows the individual pages to be shown or hidden based on other criteria? Is that legal or illegal?

I believe, and it is only my opinion with no legal backing, that all of the above just use a browser to view the content as posted by WotC and thus legal.

However, by removing the borders around my individual browser pages and making the show/hide conditions based on a card-game scheme - all of which is just the implementation of a custom browser - I have just created an application that can basically play a game like Magic The Gathering. So where do you draw the line?

It seems to me that the answer isn't in what technology the copyright material is used with (e.g. browser, MapTools, etc) but in how it is used. Although the aboves just uses web browers - which is how WotC intended the content to be used - it obviously violates the *intention* of providing the database as a reference (instead of using it to play the game). The author did not get paid for his work so you don't have the rights to use it. If, on the other hand, you had bought all of the cards that you were using in the above scheme then their use should be allowed (as long as they are not duplicated and/or stored). Of course the scheme would probably still not be allowed for other reasons (i.e. using the website's bandwidth for playing the game). On the other hand, the opposite should also be true. If I have bought a module then I should be able to use it in any format (e.g. digitized for MapTools) as long as it is not distributed and only one format is used at once (e.g. if you are using it in a MapTools campaign then the original hardcopy stays on the shelf and is not lent to anyone).

Having said all that, the above seems like the logical way to resolve copyright maximizes satisfaction for both the author and the users...the author's work is not duplicated so the author does not loose revenue and/or control but the user can use the item in the best suitable format...so it seems very likely that this is NOT how the copyright law actually works (because, lets face it, most of the time the law does not make sense).

[Azhrei]

Now what if I link directly to the card image to look up the same infromation? Is that legal or illegal?

Legal.

Now what if I opened up a browser that supports multiple pages and looked up multiple cards at once? Is that legal or illegal?

Legal. (How is this different from the first one?)

Now I use a browser that can cascade the pages show that I can view the multiple cards at once? Is that legal or illegal?

Legal. (How is this different from the first one?)

Now I implement a custom browser that does the same as above but allows the individual pages to be shown or hidden based on other criteria? Is that legal or illegal?

Questionable. You are now filtering out content and thus providing "editorial control" over what the user sees.

It seems to me that the answer isn't in what technology the copyright material is used with (e.g. browser, MapTools, etc) but in how it is used.

Just figuring this out, eh?

The best solution is to write software that allows the user to pick and choose which images they want to grab from the source web site. This puts editorial control in the hands of the user -- and the end user has implicit and explicit rights to access the web site so there is no conflict.

I've written code like this myself. It makes requests to the web site and then displays it to the user who selects the portion of the page that they want. The application then makes more requests going to other URLs and using the user's choices on the first one as a default on the second one. The user is then asked to confirm the selection or correct it, if necessary. Over time the software can learn which pieces the user actually wants and the process becomes totally automated.

Such software doesn't violate any law that I'm aware of (DMCA, copyright, etc) although that doesn't mean our congresscritters won't come up with a new one.

[Benz72]

To this end, for all you Magic The Gathering players, I have written a program that gets Magic The Garthering card images directly from the Gatherer (Wizards Of The Coast) website. These can then be drawn into MapTools as tokens and with an appropriate framework (like the one I am currently working on) you can play Magic The Gathering.

Any updates on progress?