Re: Re: Fan Publication Policy Objections

From: donald_at_...
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 00:44:57 GMT


In message <011801c52ff9$94d0c800$9d6b7640_at_oemcomputer> "Roderick and Ellen Robertson" writes:

>Because the FPP is a legal document, and there are things you do & don't do
>in a legal document to cover your ass.

Indeed and if it were to be written from the fans point of view as opposed to the publishers it would be equally oppresive the other way. This is why many countries restrict what can be included in standard contracts and courts often interpret them against the writer.

>My biggest gripes with the gripes that I've read are:
>
>People are not willing to give II the benefit of the doubt. The use of the
>word "can" does *not* imply that whatever *can* be done *will* be done.
>hard-nosed legalistic penalties are absolutely standard in this sort of
>thing. Hell, read the License Agreement next time you install a new piece of
>software if you want some scary reading.

I can only speak for myself but I never give legal documents the benefit of the doubt. When that document has been written in another country, on the basis of laws and a judical system that I'm not familiar with and by agreeing to it I'm placing myself subject to those laws and legal system then I think a degree of caution is warrented. Especially when that legal system is notorious for expense, delay and complexity. That's quite different from viewing the motives of people the documents are written for with suspicion.

>People want to deny II the same rights that they themselves already enjoy.
>Fans use II information all the time without attributing it. If you write
>your "Vinga's Little Sister XXX" story, are you atteributing all the names
>and Gloranthan ideas to Greg and/or II?

I can't recall seeing a fan publication, in print or on the web, which didn't acknowledge Issaries. At the same time it is clearly absurd to expect any publication to acknowledge every idea or name specifically. Significant contributions are a different matter.

>Finally, you might ask yourself *why* Greg felt he had to protect his
>intellectual property in this way. If it weren't for some "fans" who abused
>Greg's trust and good will, we wouldn't be in this mess. So blame II all you
>want, but take the time to curse the sh*theads that forced them to take this
>course as well.

You are obviously familiar with this, I'm not and nor I suspect are most people on the list. Therefore I cannot tell how it relates to the elaborate and complex legal document we're discussing.

-- 
Donald Oddy
http://www.grove.demon.co.uk/

Powered by hypermail