CGL Speculation #8, Put on your asbestos underwear Options

[Cardul]

AH posting his drafts before anything is published by CGL instead of afterwards will assure one thing: No accusations that he is lieing about his drafts being so close, that he has fabricated his drafts after reading CGL's material etc. will be possible.

That alone is reason enough to post the drafts.

He still could have. The existence of the Mysterious Leak puts doubt into that statement. While I do not
believe that is the case, how could you prove that he was not leaked the stuff, and changed his drafts
to include stuff from the leaked drafts? Especially if CGL did the smart thing and destroyed the originals
from AH to avoid temptation to use them as reference material?

[Lansdren]

He still could have. The existence of the Mysterious Leak puts doubt into that statement. While I do not
believe that is the case, how could you prove that he was not leaked the stuff, and changed his drafts
to include stuff from the leaked drafts? Especially if CGL did the smart thing and destroyed the originals
from AH to avoid temptation to use them as reference material?

This might be taking paranoia a bit far.

Whilst I can appreciate being concerned for someone’s motives suggesting that someone such as AH who has been pretty upfront during this situation would steal work to claim falsely that someone else has stolen his work might just seem to be entering the realms of silliness.

[Fuchs]

And I think Jason Hardy would have brought that up, instead of his point about proofreaders.

[Rotbart van Dain...]

Also, if I was CGL, and I knew that legally derivative works of something are considered to be owned by the copyright holder, and I owned the rights to Shadowrun via license, and I knew AH's work was derivative of Shadowrun, so ergo, I technically owned the copyright to AH's work […]

No, you don't. Topps owns Shadowrun, so anything taken from their pool still belongs to Topps, no matter who licenses it. The rest belongs to whomever created it. And using it without permission is a lawsuit waiting to happen.

[Ancient History]

Whatever else I think of Bills, I believe his e-mail was polite, firm, and to the point. I might have hoped for a better resolution, but I understand his position. I've never had an NDA with CGL and didn't break it during that time, but he can't afford to trust me. That's fine, but I couldn't afford to trust him either. The good news for the fans is: hey! Free stuff.

[LurkerOutThere]

This might be taking paranoia a bit far.

Whilst I can appreciate being concerned for someone’s motives suggesting that someone such as AH who has been pretty upfront during this situation would steal work to claim falsely that someone else has stolen his work might just seem to be entering the realms of silliness.

Yea the slippery slope of morality is funny like that, once your ethics are compromised it's hard to undo.
Personally Bobby has put a lot of folks in an unprovable situation here and elsewhere, he's made multiple statements based on draft work, concept work, or might have been projects or projects that he has worked on and has had a hand in. The company can't defend against these allegations because on what planet would sending a draft of a working product to someone that has proven over and over again they can't keep any sort of confidence make sense?

It's especially jarring considering if he was actually concerned his work was getting used inappropriately. He could just start mailing some drafts to himself (or others) certified mail or getting them in the hands of a document repository. Anything that puts a verifiable date or postmark on them. Then he waits a few months and if the drafts match his work he's got a lawsuit waiting to happen that would not only hold teeth against CGL/IMR but tops or anyone that wanted to republish the books in question.

I hope Bobby has a logical explanation for his thought process but it seems like he's gone at this once again in about the least appropriate way possible.

[Lansdren]

Yea the slippery slope of morality is funny like that, once your ethics are compromised it's hard to undo.
Personally Bobby has put a lot of folks in an unprovable situation here and elsewhere, he's made multiple statements based on draft work, concept work, or might have been projects or projects that he has worked on and has had a hand in. The company can't defend against these allegations because on what planet would sending a draft of a working product to someone that has proven over and over again they can't keep any sort of confidence make sense?

It's especially jarring considering if he was actually concerned his work was getting used inappropriately. He could just start mailing some drafts to himself (or others) certified mail or getting them in the hands of a document repository. Anything that puts a verifiable date or postmark on them. Then he waits a few months and if the drafts match his work he's got a lawsuit waiting to happen that would not only hold teeth against CGL/IMR but tops or anyone that wanted to republish the books in question.

I hope Bobby has a logical explanation for his thought process but it seems like he's gone at this once again in about the least appropriate way possible.

The explanation seems pretty straight forward to me. The work is out now for us to see in advance.

If something comes out which is obviously similar (beyond just common sense or benefit of the doubt) then we will probably see a big I told you so from AH.

Truthfully I think the rewritten stuff will be somewhat similar because there are only so many ways to write something but I do hope it’s not something as tacky as a carbon copy.

[Ancient History]

Yea the slippery slope of morality is funny like that, once your ethics are compromised it's hard to undo.
Personally Bobby has put a lot of folks in an unprovable situation here and elsewhere, he's made multiple statements based on draft work, concept work, or might have been projects or projects that he has worked on and has had a hand in. The company can't defend against these allegations because on what planet would sending a draft of a working product

Cutting you off here. My general purpose is to release the drafts. I said that I would, and I make an effort to keep my promises. If I had waited until after the books were published, and it had turned out that there were extreme similarities between the drafts, it might have been difficult or impossible to release them.

I don't like putting people in difficult situations, but sometimes it has to be done. I did not get a chance to view all of the drafts myself. I understand CGL's reasoning behind that. I honestly cannot confirm if those drafts are representative, and they were certainly first drafts, before any editing. Maybe Jason would have caught it before it went to press. Certainly I think he has especial incentive to do so now - and that's the point. If I had sat quiet and done nothing, nothing would be done to address the situation. By doing it this way, I can at least ensure that the drafts are posted for those who want them, and CGL has extra incentive to make sure my claims are false when/if they release more books.

to someone that has proven over and over again they can't keep any sort of confidence make sense?

Exsqueeze me? I can't keep any sort of confidence? What exactly have I ever revealed that should have been kept in confidence, except for a few of my views on other people's drafts (which I admitted was a mistake and apologized for)? Have you seen me leaking documents to Dumpshock? No. I was banned from the freelancer pool for telling the truth, so you can understand why I might have an axe to grind (and grind it I do), but have I ever revealed details of upcoming metaplots? Or told people about books in the production queue that had not already been mentioned previously by Jason? No.

I can understand why CGL doesn't want to turn over drafts for my perusal, but don't you be casting aspersions on my ability to keep things in confidence, boyo.

It's especially jarring considering if he was actually concerned his work was getting used inappropriately. He could just start mailing some drafts to himself (or others) certified mail or getting them in the hands of a document repository. Anything that puts a verifiable date or postmark on them. Then he waits a few months and if the drafts match his work he's got a lawsuit waiting to happen that would not only hold teeth against CGL/IMR but tops or anyone that wanted to republish the books in question.

I keep telling people this but poor man's copyright does not exist.

[Mesh]

For those of you interested in copyright law, the US government has an FAQ. You need to register your copyright if you wish to pursue a legal case.

Mesh

PS The US Government recommends
ending the overuse of posting comments
and reviews as Fastjack in Shadowrun
source books.

[Cthulhudreams]

Yea the slippery slope of morality is funny like that, once your ethics are compromised it's hard to undo.
Personally Bobby has put a lot of folks in an unprovable situation here and elsewhere, he's made multiple statements based on draft work, concept work, or might have been projects or projects that he has worked on and has had a hand in. The company can't defend against these allegations because on what planet would sending a draft of a working product to someone that has proven over and over again they can't keep any sort of confidence make sense?

It's especially jarring considering if he was actually concerned his work was getting used inappropriately. He could just start mailing some drafts to himself (or others) certified mail or getting them in the hands of a document repository. Anything that puts a verifiable date or postmark on them. Then he waits a few months and if the drafts match his work he's got a lawsuit waiting to happen that would not only hold teeth against CGL/IMR but tops or anyone that wanted to republish the books in question.

I hope Bobby has a logical explanation for his thought process but it seems like he's gone at this once again in about the least appropriate way possible.

I can understand that you think Frank is a horrible hateful hack, but it's really a stretch when you try and apply the same label to AH. You'd be hard pressed to identify anyway who has invested as much passion in making SR a success - which is why he is so hacked off now, having been burnt by the company that he's invested quite some time in supporting.

No-one freelances just for the money, the money just isn't as good as you can make else where.

[Endroren]

He still could have. The existence of the Mysterious Leak puts doubt into that statement. While I do not
believe that is the case, how could you prove that he was not leaked the stuff, and changed his drafts
to include stuff from the leaked drafts? Especially if CGL did the smart thing and destroyed the originals
from AH to avoid temptation to use them as reference material?

You can drop that bit of speculation. I can verify that the drafts he released are what he wrote. I know this because I have his originals from back when he first wrote them, sitting here on my hard drive.

[Chrysalis]

And I think Jason Hardy would have brought that up, instead of his point about proofreaders.

I am coming into this conversation late, but what point about proofreaders?

[Fuchs]

I am coming into this conversation late, but what point about proofreaders?

Check this thread, first and second page.

The point was refuted anyway.

[Chrysalis]

Oh OK. I understand now.

[lehesu]

AH: While you may not have leaked anything in confidence (besides commenting on the drafts; you can't put the genie back in the bottle on that one), you have certainly done a good job of burning bridges on your way out. Your disparaging comments towards pretty much anything Hardy says certainly hasn't been pretty. This kind of activity towards your former employer, warranted or not, certainly gives them less incentive to accede to your requests in the future. Not that you don't already know this.

[Ancient History]

Jason and I weren't exactly sweetness and light before this happened, but I was upholding my end of things when he decided to ban me from the freelancer forums.

On which topic, Jason wishes me to be somewhat more clear, since he doesn't like being called a liar. I can appreciate that, even if my view of events might be a little distorted, but let m explain:

We (several freelancers, Jason Hardy, myself, Bull) were having a chat about Spy Games. I was being a bit snarky, and the shit had yet to completely hit the fan at Catalyst - but Adam Jury was gone, Jennifer Harding was gone, and several freelancers had withdrawn or (rumored) terminated their drafts. I had not, for various reasons. For one, except for Vice I was paid up at the time - because I'd withdrawn my copyrights several weeks earlier when the issues with Loren had first started making the freelancer gossip rounds, and I hoped it would draw things to a boil. But, since I was paid up, I endeavored to fulfill my contracts. Included in the chat were several of the new freelancers, people like Brandie Tarvin, David A. Hill Jr., and Filamena Young. In the first part of the conversation, someone asked Jason for an updated production schedule, which he supplied - I won't copy it here, because the actual order is irrelevant and you don't need to know. I had already been contacting some of the new freelancers in private side-chats with the hope of enlightening them on what the "real" situation was with CGL - I had heard some bad things about Loren, and I didn't want them to be blindsided if things went pear-shaped. When Jason posted the schedule, I straight up told several of these people that Jason was lying.

Many of the books in the schedule I knew had large sections of them that were written by freelancers that had withdrawn copyrights and/or possibly terminated sections. Adam's absence was a bigger question mark, as to whether or not his work would have to be undone and redone. In short, at the time I did not believe Jason was being at all honest in the presentation of his production schedule. I thought he was lying, and I told people that. One of them forwarded that tidbit on to Jason. Jason asked for me to be removed from the freelancer forums and Basecamp for "actively undermining me [sic] and the company." When I was banned, I terminated my contracts with CGL and withdrew my drafts.

Now, for complete honesty, I would like to point out that Jason has stuck almost exactly to the production schedule he presented in that chat. Dawn of the Artifacts 2 came out, despite Jen withholding copyright on it, and she was eventually paid for it. Personally, I think sticking to the schedule has more to do with luck than Jason actually being honest with the freelancers, but that is my opinion. In hindsight, whether or not he lied, his production schedule was correct. So I would like that to be perfectly clear.

[Cardul]

This might be taking paranoia a bit far.

Whilst I can appreciate being concerned for someone’s motives suggesting that someone such as AH who has been pretty upfront during this situation would steal work to claim falsely that someone else has stolen his work might just seem to be entering the realms of silliness.

See, that was not the point I was making. I am putting out the arguments one could make to discredit AH's claims if the stuff turned out to use his stuff.
Personally, I do not think anyone would actually use those, but...since we are dealing with electronic media, anything can be faked. How does one prove,
one way or the other, that AH's drafts really came first? How can you prove that Endroren did not set something up on his computer to mis-label the dates
of the Drafts he has? Note: I am not accusing anyone of actually doing something wrong. I am saying that, because the capability exists, these are accusations that
could be leveled. Just like my dad could be accused of being the gunman on the Grassy Knoll. Just because it is possible does not mean it is probable, but the possibility
always has to be kept there in the back of your head.(I actually worked out the possible ways someone could be hit by a Bus in their bathroom in an interior room
on the 57's floor of a sky-scraper...incredibly improbable, but possible...)

[Endroren]

but the possibility always has to be kept there in the back of your head.

I disagree completely. At some point there are facts that override any speculation. Yes, you could still come up with some crazy explanation based on unprovable conjecture ("Aliens shot Kennedy and made it look like one person!") but we must at some point accept a rational argument, otherwise you walk down the path of the original skeptics who had to be protected by their friends from physical danger since they disbelieved everything in existence.

So dealing with the issue at hand and what seems like an unnecessary attempt to inject doubt where none is demanded, let me say this - Bobby doesn't like me and I'm not exactly Bobby's biggest fan either. Granted, we hardly know each other, but a couple of bad encounters created this situation, and we simply haven't had enough contact (or perhaps the need) to "fix" things.

I get nothing from defending Bobby at this stage, HOWEVER, I also don't like falsehoods getting spread about people. In this case I'm in a position to defend the truth, and I've chosen to do so for the sake of truth. I can think of three other ways to confirm the truth of what both I and Bobby have said regarding the drafts. At this stage, I'm offering that this argument about what Bobby might have done has no merit and I believe it makes more sense to focus on the other, very real, issues at hand.

[knasser]

Exsqueeze me? I can't keep any sort of confidence? What exactly have I ever revealed that should have been kept in confidence, except for a few of my views on other people's drafts (which I admitted was a mistake and apologized for)? Have you seen me leaking documents to Dumpshock? No. I was banned from the freelancer pool for telling the truth, so you can understand why I might have an axe to grind (and grind it I do), but have I ever revealed details of upcoming metaplots? Or told people about books in the production queue that had not already been mentioned previously by Jason? No.

Well I distinctly saw a post from you once that said "I don't like the 'trees' metaplot" (1). Now you used the word 'trees.' That's a complete spoiler. You gave away practically the whole story with that. I was personally shocked and now no longer feel the need to buy the products that I already know have 'trees' in them.

Khadim.


(1) Disclaimer: I might actually be thinking of somebody else.

[Stahlseele]

So you are only going to be buying electronic documents then? O.o

[Daddy's Litt...]

Yup 'trees' that gives it all up.
Ents, got to be ents. Or AH is pining for the fjords and is branching out on his own before leafing the company. I like him, I would even say I am frond of him so I am rooting for his success but he could just be board and making cutting remarks to shave down competion or I could be just nuts and am needling him needlessly to seed what he will do.

OMG I cannot believe I wrote all that. My husband is such a bad influence.

[Stahlseele]

Yup 'trees' that gives it all up.
Ents, got to be ents. Or AH is pining for the fjords and is branching out on his own before leafing the company. I like him, I would even say I am frond of him so I am rooting for his success but he could just be board and making cutting remarks to shave down competion or I could be just nuts and am needling him needlessly to seed what he will do.

OMG I cannot believe I wrote all that. My husband is such a bad influence.

THAT is awesome and made me laugh.
Thank you very much my lady ^^

[Dr.Rockso]

Whoa whoa whoa...I think I just figured out the plot regarding the trees:

[ Spoiler ]

There is unrest in the forest,
There is trouble with the trees,
For the maples want more sunlight
And the oaks ignore their pleas.

The trouble with the maples,
(And they're quite convinced they're right)
They say the oaks are just too lofty
And they grab up all the light.
But the oaks can't help their feelings
If they like the way they're made.
And they wonder why the maples
Can't be happy in their shade.

There is trouble in the forest,
And the creatures all have fled,
As the maples scream "Oppression!"
And the oaks just shake their heads

So the maples formed a union
And demanded equal rights.
"The oaks are just too greedy;
We will make them give us light."
Now there's no more oak oppression,
For they passed a noble law,
And the trees are all kept equal
By hatchet, axe, and saw.

[JM Hardy]

Jason and I weren't exactly sweetness and light before this happened, but I was upholding my end of things when he decided to ban me from the freelancer forums.

On which topic, Jason wishes me to be somewhat more clear, since he doesn't like being called a liar. I can appreciate that, even if my view of events might be a little distorted, but let m explain:

We (several freelancers, Jason Hardy, myself, Bull) were having a chat about Spy Games. I was being a bit snarky, and the shit had yet to completely hit the fan at Catalyst - but Adam Jury was gone, Jennifer Harding was gone, and several freelancers had withdrawn or (rumored) terminated their drafts. I had not, for various reasons. For one, except for Vice I was paid up at the time - because I'd withdrawn my copyrights several weeks earlier when the issues with Loren had first started making the freelancer gossip rounds, and I hoped it would draw things to a boil. But, since I was paid up, I endeavored to fulfill my contracts. Included in the chat were several of the new freelancers, people like Brandie Tarvin, David A. Hill Jr., and Filamena Young. In the first part of the conversation, someone asked Jason for an updated production schedule, which he supplied - I won't copy it here, because the actual order is irrelevant and you don't need to know. I had already been contacting some of the new freelancers in private side-chats with the hope of enlightening them on what the "real" situation was with CGL - I had heard some bad things about Loren, and I didn't want them to be blindsided if things went pear-shaped. When Jason posted the schedule, I straight up told several of these people that Jason was lying.

Many of the books in the schedule I knew had large sections of them that were written by freelancers that had withdrawn copyrights and/or possibly terminated sections. Adam's absence was a bigger question mark, as to whether or not his work would have to be undone and redone. In short, at the time I did not believe Jason was being at all honest in the presentation of his production schedule. I thought he was lying, and I told people that. One of them forwarded that tidbit on to Jason. Jason asked for me to be removed from the freelancer forums and Basecamp for "actively undermining me [sic] and the company." When I was banned, I terminated my contracts with CGL and withdrew my drafts.

Now, for complete honesty, I would like to point out that Jason has stuck almost exactly to the production schedule he presented in that chat. Dawn of the Artifacts 2 came out, despite Jen withholding copyright on it, and she was eventually paid for it. Personally, I think sticking to the schedule has more to do with luck than Jason actually being honest with the freelancers, but that is my opinion. In hindsight, whether or not he lied, his production schedule was correct. So I would like that to be perfectly clear.

Thank you for clearing that up. I've often stated that I don't want to drag private relationships with freelancers out into the open; I also, however, do not want to regularly be accused of lying, or for it to be said that I removed Bobby from the freelancer forums because he told the truth or any such things. I presented a schedule at that meeting that I essentially continue to present to this day--DotA 2 (which came out), Corporate Guide, Almanac, War, Attitude, two products that have not yet been publicly announced, Spy Games. I gave that schedule because, from what I was told about efforts to pay people and free up projects, that would be a reasonable way to proceed. As Bobby admits, that schedule has stuck. I went with the best information I had at the time; that information turned out to be good enough that the essential schedule has been kept. I'm sure Bobby honestly believed I was lying; but I don't think his reasons for believing that were solid, and I certainly do not think he went about dealing with that issue in the proper fashion. I know what I was thinking and I knew what information I had to be making those decisions; Bobby did not know what was going on in my head. As it turns out, what I said was accurate.

Bobby was not, then, removed from the forums for "telling the truth." Nor was he removed for lying, but I think I've said as much as I want to say about it for the time being.

In re: Endroren's and Bobby's points about the originality of his drafts, I believe I can safely say that there are no plans within Catalyst to challenge the originality of the material Bobby released. I had concerns that the work of Catalyst-hired editors and proofers was used in the drafts, but Bobby has said that is not the case, and Endroren backs him up on this, so I believe it to be true. I also do not believe for a moment that Bobby copied any material from re-written drafts, or that his release of the material is some elaborate trap. I believe his central motivations are as he claims them to be.

Jason H.

[Furluge]

No, you don't. Topps owns Shadowrun, so anything taken from their pool still belongs to Topps, no matter who licenses it. The rest belongs to whomever created it. And using it without permission is a lawsuit waiting to happen.

Rotbart, I was attempting to simplify it. The license is owned by Topps, it's use is licensed out to CGL, effectively rented out to them. Under current copyright law if you make a derivative work of something the copyright doesn't belong to the creator, but the owner of the material it's derived from. So, if you write a derivative work of Shadowrun the copyright to the work belongs to the owner of Shadowrun, which is Topps... who gave the usage to those rights to CGL. Obviously if there were a lawsuit, CGL would argue it's derivative, AH's lawyers would argue it's not, etc. etc.

That's how I understand it anyway. Now granted, I don't agree with that or think it's right or just. Heck I think the laws were written the way they were by big companies and their lobbyists who wanted to use the copyright law as a way to club small content creators into submission. And I think if everyone strictly enforced copyright the way US law allows it, things would grind to a halt, but, legally, they can get away with it.