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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.


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.


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

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.

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.

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.

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

Check this thread, first and second page.

The point was refuted anyway.

Oh OK. I understand now.

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.

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.

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...)

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.

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.

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

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 ^^

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

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.

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.

Regarding Trees and Ghost Cartels:



-M&P

So, there is no law keeping me from writing all the SR stuff I want and posting it freely to the internet? As long as I don't take any money from it, that is okay? Just curious.

Check this:

Hope so, or this whole website is built in a swamp...

As far as I know you should be good. There a quite a few people on the boards who have posted awesome resources. Check out Knasser's site for some good ones. I'd be careful about using artwork from the books though.

Different people interpret the law different ways. I don't have a problem with people doing fan art, fiction, rules, whatever; however, I'm not the person who makes final decisions about how Shadowrun material is used on the web, so my opinion only goes so far. I'm not aware, however, of any instances where such things had action taken against them. Posting copyrighted material (like art, as was mentioned above)? That can get you in trouble. Showing a Shadowrun movie at a con and charging admission? Also potential trouble. Putting up your own Shadowrun writings on the web? I don't see any reason to discourage that. IANAL, of course.

Jason H.

Does anyone remember the Plastic Warriors supplements?

This, unfortunately, is a myth about copyright that is simply not true. In no instance when a writer mailed a letter and got a postmark for "copyright purposes" was this evidence upheld in a court of law.

This per a company lawyer who held a session on copyright law and violations at my day job.

Copyright is an important concept, for writers, musician, designers, etc...
...And below is a list of the top 10 copyright myths, direct from the copyright service website.

1. Copyright can protect my ideas
2. I can copyright a name or title
3. I can simply post a copy to myself as proof of copyright
4. Everything on the Internet ‘public domain’ and free to use
5. Anything without a copyright notice is not protected
6. If I change someone else’s work I can claim it as my own
7. I can legally copy 10% without it being infringement
8. It’s OK to use copy or publish other peoples work if I don't make any money out of it
9. It’s hard to prove copyright infringement
10. Confusion over copyright in music

Interesting stuff, and often misunderstood.

How is that incorrect? Do you have more details?

Mesh

That's pretty much what I got out of the course. The really interesting thing is that all those people who embed other people's YouTube videos or pics? They're breaking copyright law.

You can link to the site, but you cannot copy it to your own forum/blog without permission.

There are guidelines for fair use. Education, criticism, commentary, research, news reporting, parody, and transformative or productive use are generally protected. Denying credit to the original author, commercial use, etc. are generally not. Just because you're not making money off the deal doesn't automatically make it fair use, though.

I guess it comes back to enforcement. It might be illegal, but until the owner enforces anything...

According to the information I have, the actual "fair use" term applies only to academic purposes insofar as the U.S. law actually states. In practice, though, it does include things like parody, debate, etc.

Many writers are usually careful when throwing around the "fair use" terminology, just in case it comes back to haunt them in a court of law.

Copyright law also varies by country and date of original publication.

• Duration – between "50 years from publication" to "70 years after creators death". Because of this, Project Gutenberg Australia, legally hosts documents that would be illegal on the original Project Gutenberg (which is in the U.S.)
• Fonts – Generally not protected in the U.S., generally protected elsewhere.
• Photographic Reproduction. – Photographic reproductions of 2D art are not separately copyrightable in the US.
• Game Rules – The mechanics are specifically not protected in the U.S., the author's description of the mechanics is. Note that the "ideas are not copyrightable" point from the UK copyright list (posted previously), basically concludes the same thing.

Because the copyright still belongs to the people who published the material. They own the work, whether it's a commentary posted on their blog, a YouTube video of their Lego-mashing, or something in a book / RPG / magazine. By copying their work without permission, you are violating that copyright and essentially stealing from them. It doesn't matter whether or not you make money off of copying the work, you still need to pay them a fair fee for the use of their stuff or get their permission to use it for free.

There is, however, a copyright clearance house (two of them, I think), from which you can purchase temporary rights. One time or rights for materials over a period of time. The clearing houses are basically match-makers between copyright holders and those who wish to publish that work. Not everything is available through the clearing houses, but enough is that many companies use these clearing houses to purchase rights. Then, after a fee is taken out for the service, the remainder of the money goes to the copyright holder.

That being said: As others have noted, copyright enforcement is usually left up to the copyright holder.

Heck yes! We used it extensively in our SR2 games. There was several other supplements around that time, but sadly did not survive my transition to OSX a few years back. Does anyone still have them?

Try here.

Don't forget the Chromebook conversions. Gurth is/was awesome.

Back to the thread, I need to register and trademark NotShadowRun. Should be safe if I refer to Shadowrun as "The other one" right.

From the Copyright Act of 1976: "...the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright."

Parody and debate is covered under stuff like criticism and comment.

Oh, and hi - long time reader, first time poster.

Awesome - thanks!

Fair Use is a swamp. Last I knew there isn't a 'clear line' defense. Ultimately it's Fair Use when the judge says it is. Or it's not and you owe $250,000 plus actual damages plus legal fees.

More broadly, copyright law is a swamp.

Agreed.

I find this one pretty interesting since it means that a company could theoretically use the current SR mechanics for their own game, provided that they changed/reworded the rules explanation. It does explain why so many systems look like D&D with their 6 stats.

I have a feeling that this thread is going to get locked if we end up with to much argument on the finer points of copyright much like we did when the legal eagals were doing their bit about the word 'The'

In the spirt of moving back to the proposed subject of speculation on the current situation I wonder if things will be delayed over the summer somewhat by people going on holiday.

I know the idea to some might seem silly but i've worked on a number of bids and contracts that are worth multiple millions and they have been put on hold right in negotiation because some big boss up the line is going away for a week. What is important to us here on the low level in the real world matters little to someone much higher up the chain.