>So your argument is that copyrighting a conversation falls under the
>category of "normal"?
Yes it does. You're looking at the copyright notice, then seem to be assuming that it will be enforced with ruthless, pedantic efficiency. This is plainly not true. Transcripts of Q&A sessions have been published in con books and fan publications for years now and Chaosium has refrained from enforcing it's copyright, beyond their usual cut of the print run in some cases.
The copyright on Glorantha is very important. Without it, any games company could freely publish Gloranthan material for commercial gain, without havign to pay a license fee. It's right and propper that Greg & co. should maintain ownership of their intelectual property. That's all that's happening here. I see no reason for going into spasms about it.
> ......Alright, I'm
>being absurd here, but no more absurd than the notion that these sessions
>could not/should not be publishable. It's like an interview, from my
>perspective. You're sure as heck paying enough for it...
How many times has permission to print a gloranthan Q&A seminar in fan publications been denied? Do you believe you have the right to publish for personal profit material about glorantha derived from the copyright owner, without permission? When's the first publication in the "Brian Tickler's Glorantha" line of products due to come out?
Simon Hibbs
Powered by hypermail