Commented on the Courtney/Grimtooth stuff here: https://plus.google.com/u/0/103403509490222613258/posts/PGdhEaAcTEi
Commented on the Courtney/Grimtooth stuff here: https://plus.google.com/u/0/103403509490222613258/posts/PGdhEaAcTEi
(It's Jack Shear's stream, since I don't think Courtney opened his up to comments.)
https://accounts.google.com/ServiceLogin?service=oz&continue=https://plus.google.com/103403509490222613258/posts/PGdhEaAcTEi&hl=en-US
(It's Jack Shear's stream, since I don't think Courtney opened his up to comments.)
https://accounts.google.com/ServiceLogin?service=oz&continue=https://plus.google.com/103403509490222613258/posts/PGdhEaAcTEi&hl=en-US
Good response Humza. I think Jack's response is indicative of a lot of folks (as we discussed last night). People took Courtney's side without an understanding of the facts.
ReplyDeleteYeah. We'll see how the discussion plays out. (I could use some pointers as to which traps are lifted, since I don't have a Grimtooth's.)
ReplyDeleteA very good response, really changes the discourse. I don't really buy his 500 sources line (I mean some of them are way too specific and close to the Grimtooth version). If I have time I will add something about what constitutes plagiarism in a journalistic ethical context.
ReplyDeletehehe, I can't access it.. I think Jack blocked me. lol
ReplyDeleteMichael Moscrip it does look like it's a limited share.
ReplyDeletecopypasting the comments so far:
Humza Kazmi9:39 AMEdit
+Courtney Campbell to me, your trap posts do in fact hit the level of plagiarism because you really didn't cite your sources at all. You mentioned Grimtooth's a grand total of twice, in the comments of individual entries, and never in the posts themselves. A new or casual reader would certainly think that you were creating the trap designs yourself. I know, because I did think that for a good long while, until someone pointed out to me (well before this past week) that you were building off of preexisting materials.
You say in your post that "...in no form am I attempting to take credit for any writing that I did not myself write." But without citing your sources*, you're taking credit by omission. This may not be a deliberate act! But by posting traps on your blog without mentioning where they are from, it's read as saying "this is something I created." Even if something is paraphrased, it can still be plagiarism.
I'm not an attorney yet (waiting on my bar exam results) and I'm not commenting for the purposes of giving a legal opinion here. That said, I have studied copyright law, though it has been a little while. Off the cuff, I think that as they are, your posts might fall on the foul side of the idea-expression divide. I'd have to do a bit of checking, though.
This isn't discussing who you are as a person - I don't know you other than as a dude on the Internet. It seems like you plan on properly citing your posts, which is good! But I don't think that the statements re: plagiarism were off base.
*Mentioning stuff in the comments of individual entries doesn't really suffice. It's reminiscent of this quote: http://bit.ly/xrdXwj
Jack Shear9:46 AM
+Humza Kazmi Interesting! (And honestly? I think you're one of the few people on here actually qualified to speak to the legal aspect, so I'm glad you said something.)
Courtney Campbell10:07 AM
+Humza Kazmi No, that's a really important issue.
Let's take any of the traps mentioned, the paranoid party was one. It is true there is a section in Grimtooth on traps that affect other party members besides the thief opening the trap.
Oh, wait, it's here in mantrapping by Ragnar Benson also. Something like that in the 1e DMG? Sure enough. I mean, I've got about 500 sources here, how many of them contain that idea?
I just, I'm not running an academic journal here. Stairways. Elevators. Hallways. Pits. These are for the most part, broad ideas used in, some cases, hundreds of sources.
If there's a specific line, where one seems close and it's brought to my attention, I'll cite it, or remove it. But when you actually read the trap posts, there is very very rarely anything that has to do with a single source or idea.
Courtney Campbell10:08 AM
Here is a somewhat truncated list of my research materials for the trap series.
Wikipedia
Google Image Search
Google Search
Grimtooth's Traps (Trademark of Flying Buffalo Inc.)
Grimtooth's Traps Too (Trademark of Flying Buffalo Inc.)
Grimtooth's Traps Fore (Trademark of Flying Buffalo Inc.)
Grimtooth's Traps Ate! (Trademark of Flying Buffalo Inc.)
Mantrapping by Ragnar Benson
Undermountain Boxed Set
Dungeons by AEG
World Builder by Gary Gygax
Traps and Treachery I By Fantasy Flight Games
Traps and Treachery II by Fantasy Flight Games
Dungeon Craft by Fantasy Flight Games
Goods and Gear, the Ultimate Adventurer's Guide by Kenzer & Co.
(I have several other equipment guides, but I believe the above is the only one I've used as reference for the trap series)
Ultimate Toolbox by AEG
Dragon Magazine (Various, 300+ issues) by (Various)
That's weird.
ReplyDeleteInteresting!
ReplyDeleteAlso, I'm actually considering unblocking some people, since by-and-large all it really does is create curiosity holes in the threads of the 18 people whose posts I actually read.
That's how they drag you back in , Michael Moscrip ! ;)
ReplyDeleteThen I get clubbed by someone hiding behind the door. I know this scenario.
ReplyDeleteYep. You're getting slipped a Mickey called G+, shamus.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Humza Kazmi. Very well done.
ReplyDeleteI'd love it if you can continue to post what's happening in that thread here.
Will do, but I won't be adding much more right now. I'll hit it when I get back home (and have my copyright textbook handy :) )
ReplyDeleteHumza Kazmi Do you want some side-by-side comparisons of text?
ReplyDeleteAlso, all of these are listed under the tag 'New Content'.
Robert Parker if you have that side-by-side comparison, it would be frakkin' amazing.
ReplyDeleteAnd the New Content thing is a legit point to bring up also! I had missed that.
Okay, so he is using Wurst of Grimtooth's Traps, so I'll reference those page numbers.
ReplyDeleteHere's the first example
http://hackslashmaster.blogspot.com/2012/12/on-thursday-trick-signs.html
Courtney: "A trigger (lever, button, etc.) next to a sign that says "Treasure Vault Release". When pulled it opens a chute that drops coins of selected denominations on top of the players. If coins weigh 10 to the pound, it takes relatively little treasure to crush the players."
Grimtooth, p. 72-73: "The trap is actually quite simple. In the wall of the corridor is set a lever; posted nearby is a sign
that clearly reads “Treasure Vault Release.” The trap is set in motion when some fool actually pulls
the lever.
Pulling the lever releases the catch-pins that
secure this section of corridor, allowing it to split
in two and collapse into the pit below. This forms
a sort of funnel, which will neatly channel the
4620 cubic feet of gold coins that were hidden in
a hollow above the corridor. Assuming gold weighs
about 1000 pounds per cubic foot, we’re talking
about 4,620,000 pounds of gold here…"
Courtney: "Another example is a slide labeled "Safe Exit". It will allow you to exit the dungeon safely, but leaves you thousands of feet in the air."
Grimtooth, p. 83: "Near the entrance to this chute, post a sign saying something like “Emergency Exit — this chute is guaranteed to get you out of the dungeon alive.” The chute itself should be very long — thousands of feet, at the very least — so that the delver must spend several minutes sliding through it in total darkness. When at last the chute ends, the victim zips out of a hole on the face of a cliff that’s at least 500 feet high. The character has indeed exited the dungeon alive, and he is in fine shape — assuming he can fly. Otherwise, the exit has indeed caused a real emergency."
Courtney: "A sign with text on it surrounding the trigger. The sign says "Push to X" where X is opening a door or some other desired effect. The trigger itself has a negative effect, setting off a trap or the like."
Grimtooth, p. 117: "The door has no handles or other fixtures by which to open it. On the right hand wall, however,
the delvers see a small button with the label “Open”
on it.
Pushing the button will open the door. It drops
out into the corridor like a drawbridge, crushing
the simpleton who pushed the button."
He steals three traps in one post!
That first one is a mind-bogglingly dumb trap. "I will kill the unsuspecting with a trap...made up of an entire world's worth of gold!"
ReplyDeleteAll of those are just kind of "fuck yous" in an eye-rolly sort of way. Death may be pointless or even stupid, but does it have to come with sub- Looney Tunes-esque gaggery? Why was C- wasting so much time on this bullshit to begin with? Ok. Well, I know the answer to that one.
ReplyDeleteI hadn't mentioned this before, but to be honest I had looked through all of the Grimtooth's books before and never found anything I'd even consider using, even in a modified state. That doesn't lessen what's-his-name's offence though.
ReplyDeleteMichael Moscrip I dunno, some of the low-lethality traps aren't too bad. "Step into this pit! The spikes are all angled, so you must either take a long time extracting them from your flesh or rip your leg out and risk taking lots of damage."
ReplyDeleteI'd say that makes it more eggregious. You're gonna steal, and that's what you choose to steal?
ReplyDeleteOf course, it's long ago been established that I don't share C- views on what constitutes a good game.
Courtney uses Grimtooth's Traps for this one, so those will be the pages referenced:
ReplyDeletehttp://hackslashmaster.blogspot.com/2012/09/on-thursday-trick-peephole.html
Courtney: "A mirror can be placed so that the victim sees his own eyes staring back. Stabbing at the eyes can cause blades to break the weapon (or the arm) or puncturing the mirror can release poison gas."
Grimtooth, p. 48: "A one-way mirror has been installed behind the standard hole-in-the-wall. Behind this mirror stands a bloodthirsty and fearsome troll, his hands held ready upon twin triggers. Poised within the wall, set so as to be able to spring powerfully into the middle of the hole, sit two sharpened iron wedges.
When a delver looks through the whole, he sees the reflection of his own eyes looking back at him... Seing "eyes" staring back at him, the delver will porbably move quikly for his sword, then stab it dep into the hole in an effort to blind the creature beyond. When this happens, the troll releases the wedges, and crack! - the sword is broken.
If the delver uses his dagger instead, note that his elvow will probably pass into the wall at the point where the steel wedges usually meet. More's the pity."
Courtney: "Needles or blades can spring forward, doing actual damage (not just hit point damage) directly to a victim's eyes. This can cause blindness, usually permanent. It is trivial to replace this with an acid, chemical, or fire spray."
Grimtooth, p. 48: "Set in a wall, perhaps partly hidden by intricate stonework, are two eyeholes... If the character moves in to get a better look, the pressure of his forehead against the stone wall will cause a section of the wall to move slightly, dislodging the spike on the other side of the hole to swing freely. The whole assembly will swing down into the eyes of the delver, with predictable results."
There are some Grimtooth's traps that I do like, but the psych-out / gotcha traps are stupid, no doubt.
ReplyDeleteMan, so many of these steal so many of Grimtooth's traps at once it is a huge pain to break them down into each trap stolen.
ReplyDeleteA lot of these he very subtly changes, too, which makes it more difficult to bust him unless you've read the traps.
ReplyDeleteLuckily, he isn't always careful:
http://hackslashmaster.blogspot.com/2012/02/on-thursday-trick-white-phosphorus.html
"So there is some body of water - either a pool, or a waterfall, cascading down over a beautiful white-yellow statues with exquisite manufacture. Or perhaps a yellow-white necklace rests at the bottom of the pool. Perhaps these items are studded with gems (or what I like to call shrapnel) ...
The thing about phosphorus is that it is extremely reactive upon contact with air. It will very quickly after being removed from the water dry off and begin to smoke. Shortly after that it will produce thick clouds of smoke only seconds before self igniting in the air, flinging large chunks of burning phosphorus everywhere. Conveniently once contacting flesh, it continues to burn!
Something small like a necklace or jewelry will do 3d8, minus 1d8 per round in a 10' radius, save for half, unless you are wearing it, in which case the funeral will be closed casket. Something large like a statue would do 7d8, minus 1d8 per round in a 40' radius, save for half."
Grimtooth (Grimtooth's Traps, p. 38): "The Hot Rocks, a necklace with a twist. Found in a fountain of water, this necklace is a chain of precious metal set with six round stones and a diamond... The six stones of the necklace are phosphorous, an element that will burn after prolonged contact with air. The water in the fountain insulated the necklace from the air, preventing combustion. Shortly after a delver removes the necklace from the water... the phosphorous will undergo a heated transformation."
And, again, the next trap on the same page:
ReplyDeletehttp://hackslashmaster.blogspot.com/2012/07/on-thursday-trick-natural-hazards.html
Courtney: "Sodium: This is silvery metal (Looks like platinum!) that has wonderful properties when exposed to water. It begins to leak a damaging alkali and a highly flammable gas. A classic is having a giant "platinum" statue in a room behind a waterfall or beyond a pool. The explosion should do both large flame damage, but also spray their wounds with solvent, causing lots of damage over time."
Grimtooth (Grimtooth's Traps, p. 38): "Behind a waterfall of some sort stands a grotto or alcove... Within the grotto sits a mound of treasure; resting atop the treasure is a beautiful statue of a water nymph. The statuette is made of silvery white metal and is obviously of great value... The statuette was sculpted from pure sodium, an element that will combust upon contact with water. When the characters carry this item back through the waterfall, it will almost certainly become wet and explode."
Yeah, I recognized the sodium one, at least (it was in a traps netbook way back when - they sourced their shit!).
ReplyDeleteThis is really helpful, Robert Parker - having these to reference will be great when I'm writing more. Many thanks!
Christ, there is like three dozen of these.
ReplyDeletehttp://hackslashmaster.blogspot.com/2011/08/on-thursday-trick-falling-up.html
Courtney: "While walking along, the lead person activates a patch of reverse gravity, and falls, crashing through the false ceiling, smashing into the extended ceiling far above. At which point, the reverse gravity ends, and the character comes crashing back into the ground taking the damage again.
Variations: There could be a series of these, each heading in a different direction, causing a character to fall far from his origin. The reverse gravity could be constant instead of activated by a person tripping a magical trigger, forcing them to "climb" out from within the pit. The ceiling of the pit could be filled with loose debris, or possibly spikes, or some sort of fragile container filled with a dangerous substance."
Grimtooth (Wurst of Grimtooth's Traps, p. 117): "When the handle is touched, a pair of magical plates
“turns on.” One plate is at the delver’s feet and the other is
overhead. The area in a 10-foot square in front of the door
is transformed by a heavy reverse gravity field. Anyone
standing in the area will fly up to the ceiling, and break on
through the thin balsa shim that just looks like ceiling. His
flight ends against the spikes in the real ceiling."
No problem.
ReplyDeleteAnd another:
ReplyDeletehttp://hackslashmaster.blogspot.com/2011/05/on-thursday-trick-more-player-agency.html
Courtney: "This is a simple pit illusion. In the center of a room or corridor is a pit that runs almost to the edges of the room. On either side of the pit are small safe looking ledges about two feet across. The inside of the pit should be filled with spikes or snakes - something nasty.
What's actually going on, is that the center of the room is actually just a safe room floor. The image of the pit is an illusion. However the ledges on either side of the pit are actually deep (20'+) pits filled with many sharp spikes (preferably poisoned) covered in the illusion of a safe floor."
Grimtooth (Wurst of Grimtooth's Traps, p. 16): "It presents the delvers with a room, the
center of which is occupied by a spike-filled pit.
The only way around the pit appears to be walkways
to either side of the spikes... The visible pit is an illusion, as is the section of roof above the walkways. In reality, the roof is covered with rows of spikes not unlike those in the
pit... So, walking across the “pit” is actually the safe
way through. Using the walkways causes the springs
beneath the floor to slam those sections against
the ceiling. Ouch."
Okay, that should be enough for now.
ReplyDeleteYeah, this is lots of excellent stuff to work with. Many thanks!
ReplyDeleteWould it be okay if I post the thread to Courtney's blog later?
ReplyDeleteThe list of comparisons you've posted, or the entire discussion from Jack Shear's stream?
ReplyDeleteThe discussion from Jack's stream.
ReplyDeleteIt's fine by me, but it is a limited post on Jack's part, so it might not be 100% appropriate, y'know?
ReplyDeleteThat's fair.
ReplyDeleteFor those who can follow the thread, did Courtney ever respond?
ReplyDeleteRobert Parker Two posts: 1,
ReplyDeleteOk, I just went through a bunch of my resources to make sure:
Those you list, that "Cry out for citation", (specifically: http://hackslashmaster.blogspot.com/2011/03/on-thursday-trick-triple-bonus.html) I believe they are completely original. I mean, it's been two years since I've written them, but I reviewed my most commonly used sources and didn't find anything like them. Also, I have vague memories of working out exactly how they would work and using my trick document to do so. Clearly if I am wrong I will cite them (and if they do have a source, my inability to remember it is a pretty strong argument for the citation)
The other one, about phosphorus, it is true there is a similar trap in Grimtooth (The Hot Rocks), but again we are talking about the physical properties of a chemical substance. The grimtooth trap is about a necklace, but as you can see, the article itself talks about phosphorus in general, the ability to detect it and the amount of damage it causes. It suggests a magic aura on the phosphorus (where the original, now that I have it out, says there's a magic diamond involved apparently).
I freely admit, it was Grimtooth and not military service or familiarity with weapons that made me aware that phosphorus is combustible when wet with air but I believe I spent the time on the article with wikipedia and other science sources,
But that's not really the point. The point is that what we are doing is having an intellectual property law trial right here. Based on my understanding, this discussion is very similar to what actually occurs in a trial.
And mostly, the response will be as it is above. "This is pretty generic in it's phrasing". I am aware of my sources and intellectual property. I take pains to not commit plagiarism.
What is happening is that someone is reading something that kind of reminds them of something they saw once, and they are casting accusations about it being plagiarized, when a close look reveals it isn't copied at all. Because of the ubiquitous nature of these traps this is something that will occur to anyone who writes about traps ever .
Anyway +Humza Kazmi, I really appreciate the time you took to talk with me. I mean what I said, I want this to be on the up-and-up, which is why I e-mailed Rick Loomis. It's also why I'm taking the time to talk to people about their concerns. If there is something that needs an explicit cite, I will make it.
and 2:
That said, there are likely traps (outside of those mentioned) that are pretty close to their originals (some of the pits and whatnot), and with all the hoopla and recriminations, I'm going to take the time to go back through and make sure I cite them.
Dude should work for Fox News. I've never seen a motherfucker spin so hard.
ReplyDeleteYeah, see I would have been cool with a response like that sometime ago (ideally with a bit more mea culpa), but after all this time to just give that.
ReplyDeleteYeah, it is crazy bold.
ReplyDeleteCopying my posts over:
ReplyDeleteHey guys. Apologies for the delay – it takes me a while to get back from work.
COURTNEY I don’t think that this is a trial. Maybe it’s my biased perspective, but a trial would have a full comparison, testimony from all parties, and so forth. (My office was recently preparing for a trial, so I’m a bit twitchy on that score perhaps.) This is just a discussion, and as I’ve said before, this should not in any way be considered legal advice or a legal opinion or etc. I am not speaking as an attorney here, merely an individual who has studied this area to some extent. (On the subject of plagiarism, I served for two years as a law journal editor, and plagiarism is something which we had to deal with there.)
>> “Those you list, that "Cry out for citation", (specifically:http://hackslashmaster.blogspot.com/2011/03/on-thursday-trick-triple-bonus.html) I believe they are completely original. I mean, it's been two years since I've written them, but I reviewed my most commonly used sources and didn't find anything like them. Also, I have vague memories of working out exactly how they would work and using my trick document to do so. Clearly if I am wrong I will cite them (and if they do have a source, my inability to remember it is a pretty strong argument for the citation)”
OK. Of the traps listed in the triple bonus post, I was thinking primarily of the mirror trap. I know I’ve seen something very similar to the mirror trap (though admittedly not identical) in one of the old, old “AD&D Netbook of Traps” I browsed through as a kid. The other two, I can’t speak to.
>> “The other one, about phosphorus, it is true there is a similar trap in Grimtooth (The Hot Rocks), but again we are talking about the physical properties of a chemical substance. The grimtooth trap is about a necklace, but as you can see, the article itself talks about phosphorus in general, the ability to detect it and the amount of damage it causes. It suggests a magic aura on the phosphorus (where the original, now that I have it out, says there's a magic diamond involved apparently).
I freely admit, it was Grimtooth and not military service or familiarity with weapons that made me aware that phosphorus is combustible when wet with air but I believe I spent the time on the article with wikipedia and other science sources, “
And that’s the bit which should trigger citation. You have certainly put work into some of these – creating the damage in your Hot Rocks variant – but the genesis of the idea came from the Grimtooth trap. That’s the point at which you should say “Right, time to cite this.”
OK. Let’s take a look at copyright (and particularly US copyright because I have no idea how copyright works in other nations.) As has been discussed, there is a distinction between the idea and the expression of that idea. “The expression is copyrightable, but not the idea.” Well, what does that mean? (Note: I’m using Copyright in a Global Economy by Cohen, Loren, Okediji, and O’Rourke, 3rd ed. as a guide here; while I’ve gone through the material before, it’s a very handy way of organizing this and helping focus the discussion).
Section 102 of the Copyright Act notes that copyright does not extend to “any idea, procedure, process, system…regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied.” This is the idea/expression distinction, and it’s the primary issue at hand in our discussion.
The Supreme Court took a look at this, in 1879, in a case called Baker v. Selden, 101 U.S. 99 (1879). Here, the court draws a distinction between “publishing a book on science or the useful arts,” which may require demonstration of fundamental principles that aren’t copyrightable, and “ornamental designs, or pictorial illustrations addressed to the taste…their object [is] the production of pleasure in their contemplation.” One could make the case that a book on how to make actual traps might fall on the idea rather than expression side of things, but we’re clearly not talking about that here! Given that these are theoretical designs, they would fall under the expression side, which is protectable by copyright.
ReplyDeleteA later case, A.A. Hoehling v. Universal Studios, 618 F.2d 972 (2nd Cir., 1980), takes a further look at originality. The Hoehling case was about an author of a historical work on the Hindenberg’s destruction, suing Universal for the film that they made, alleging that Universal stole his plot. The court held that the expression of ideas was copyrightable, but that given that this was about historical events, one was unable to copyright an interpretation of historical events (Hoehling was perhaps the first to conclude that Eric Spehle, a Hindenberg crewman, might have been the saboteur, a point which the film kinda followed.) The court here made two relevant rulings: one, that factual information is public domain, and two, that “scenes a faire” are not copyrightable. Scenes a faire (there ought to be accents there, sorry) are essentially stock elements for the period that are relevant. In the case of the Hindenberg, the court ruled that “common German greetings of the period…or songs, such as the German National anthem,” along with shots of the crew partying in a beer hall, were so common and fundamental that it would not be feasible to “write about a particular historical era or fictional theme” without using them.
Courts use a “substantial similarity” test for determining if one work may have copied another. This portion is one where the law can’t guide us completely – we’ve got to look at the relevant components of the two works in question. (There’s a second test, that of access, but since COURTNEY has said that he’s used Grimtooth and other sources as inspiration, access is not relevant.) One quote that’s relevant here: “Everything registers somewhere in our memories, and no one can tell what may evoke it…Once it appears that another has in fact used the copyright as the source of this production, he has invaded the author’s rights. It is no excuse that in so doing his memory has played him a trick.” Fred Fisher v. Dillingham, 298 F.145, 147 (S.D.N.Y., 1924) (quoted in Three Boys Music Corp v. Michael Bolton, 212 F.3d 477 (9th Cir. 2000)).
As I said, the law can’t guide us fully, and we have to compare the two works. If we were in a trial, this would be the area where the jury would be shown the two exhibits, and the attorneys would wind up discussing (through witnesses) the similarities and differences between them.
Now, I don’t own any Grimtooth books, so I can’t speak with authority here. But +Robert Parker has gone ahead and made some comparisons, so I’ll quote him on this. It looks like this first one is quoting Wurst of Grimtooth’s Traps :
*
http://hackslashmaster.blogspot.com/2012/12/on-thursday-trick-signs.html
Courtney: "A trigger (lever, button, etc.) next to a sign that says "Treasure Vault Release". When pulled it opens a chute that drops coins of selected denominations on top of the players. If coins weigh 10 to the pound, it takes relatively little treasure to crush the players."
Courtney: "Sodium: This is silvery metal (Looks like platinum!) that has wonderful properties when exposed to water. It begins to leak a damaging alkali and a highly flammable gas. A classic is having a giant "platinum" statue in a room behind a waterfall or beyond a pool. The explosion should do both large flame damage, but also spray their wounds with solvent, causing lots of damage over time."
ReplyDeleteGrimtooth (Grimtooth's Traps, p. 38): "Behind a waterfall of some sort stands a grotto or alcove... Within the grotto sits a mound of treasure; resting atop the treasure is a beautiful statue of a water nymph. The statuette is made of silvery white metal and is obviously of great value... The statuette was sculpted from pure sodium, an element that will combust upon contact with water. When the characters carry this item back through the waterfall, it will almost certainly become wet and explode."
*
There is the “fair use” component of copyright (section 107 of the Copyright Act), which allows individuals to use a copyrighted work “for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching…scholarship, or research.” But fair use requires citation. If you’re using it, you have to say where you got it from. As of right now (April 10, 2013, 11:33 PM Eastern) the links I mentioned do not have citations. No mention of Grimtooth, either in the post or in the comments.
Oh shit!
ReplyDeleteBad fucking ass, dude.
ReplyDeleteAs for plagiarism - as discussed above, plagiarism is taking another's ideas and casting them as your own.
ReplyDeleteA while back, I followed Hack & Slash, and read through a good chunk of the tricks and traps posts. I'm a tolerably well read fellow, even in the realm of RPGs. I had no idea that the tricks and traps essays were intended to be discussing the work of other authors, particularly since they have been tagged with "new content." Clearly you've added your discussion of player agency to the tricks and traps you're mentioning, but as you state here (http://hackslashmaster.blogspot.com/2013/04/on-reader-mail-accusation.html ) "The whole point of the series is to discuss agency in regard to old traps."
This was absolutely not clear from your posts. A reader, even a reasonably sophisticated reader, looking at the bulk of your posts, would be led to assume that these were new traps and tricks that you were newly creating. Only in a scant few was any source credited.
You've changed the words and you've added your own discussion of agency, but without clear credit or mention of where the ideas are coming from, it's still plagiarism, even if you're not deliberately setting out to make it so. Paraphrasing isn’t enough.
Now, you've stated that you're not running an academic journal. That's fair. You're running a blog, you want to post cool things. And the idea of a series looking at old traps and seeing how to improve them is a great one! But posts that do that, that rely on the work of others for the fundamental idea, need to be cited.
It looks like you’ve credited the Grimtooth folks on the index, which is excellent! But for the various tricks and traps that you’ve put up, if you want to make sure that it doesn’t come across as plagiarism, it really would be best to cite the sources that you’re using in each individual entry.
I’m not writing this in an effort to say “ZOMG look at Courtney, he is a bad person!” You’ve stated that you want to make sure things are on the up-and-up, and I’m glad to hear that. These posts are intended, ultimately, as suggestions to make sure that things are, in fact, that way.
Just thinking that it might be a good idea to let it go after today.
ReplyDeleteFrom a let's not get too bitter and unfocused on the fun perspective.
ReplyDeleteChris Kutalik Yeah, I'm going to make one more post and then say "Look, I posted here out of interest in the subject matter but I don't have the time to keep up with this in any detail."
ReplyDeleteI think the important points have been made, at this point. A lot of things that the whole "community" ought to think about really
ReplyDeleteI completely agree. Humza Kazmi did a great job at getting the message out and explaining the moral and legal dimensions.
ReplyDeleteMy latest post:
ReplyDeleteQuick responses to some of the questions raised here (and by +Ian Burns elsewhere). I don't think I can get all of the questions raised, so I'll hit a few of the highlights.
+Ian Burns you asked "Let's say I read some trap 3 years ago, then I create a similar trap, though I honestly believe it to be my own creation, and post it to my blog without giving credit to the original author. To was extent would that be in violation of the law?"
To that, I'd look to the quote from the Fred Fisher case I mentioned in Part 1 of my wall of text. It would be a violation of copyright. Extent is a trickier matter, and I'm not quite sure how to approach it. (I doubt it would be something that would go to trial, for instance!)
+Courtney Campbell A few of your questions:
3. The actual / theoretical portion I was talking about - if these were guidelines for how people could physically go and make traps to kill people in the real world, there would be much less copyright protection, because it's discussing an actual physical process. (There might be other issues, like how you shouldn't make traps to kill people at home.) Taken as a whole, I think that the presentation of "a phosphorus necklace stored in a pool as a trap to kill or grievously injure adventurer characters in a fantasy role-playing game" winds up nearing that substantially similar threshold, by my way of thinking.
5 (broadly) it is completely OK to use facts, and to come up with your own new ways of using magnesium in gaming traps and whatnot. When you say things like the line about the "classic statute beneath the waterfall," though, that becomes a bit murkier. You'd be much better saying "the classic statue beneath the waterfall like in Grimtooth's", for instance.
6. Regarding fair use, there are four factors that are relevant, as listed in Section 107 of the Copyright Act.
*The purpose and character of the use
*The nature of the copyrighted work
*The amount and substantiality of the portion used
*The effect of the use on the market or value of the work
If you're putting something which is a significant portion of the work (like a trap from a collection of traps), then that can have an effect on the market and the value of the work. If you're making a quote to illuminate or clarify a point in an argument, that probably doesn't need as much citation as if you're quoting something and analyzing, remixing, or critiquing it.
Fair use is an extremely nebulous topic, which makes it rough to analyze. I am going to stay away from further analysis of it here, because it's been a while and it's a complex business.
8. Re: "new content," fair enough, but you can see that there is another reading which a casual observer would readily come to, namely, "this is new content which I have created."
You and +Chris Kutalik remind me about images - I have tried to cite them properly, but I think I've messed up a few times (and definitely on Tumblr). I should fix that; TinEye is a good place to do so.
10. The fact that Rick got the traps as submissions from other folks isn't quite pertinent - AFAIK he negotiated some sort of agreement with them for the use of the traps when the books were being created, and had the right to publish them. I don't think that Rick's comment changes the responsibility to cite sources on the blog.
11. I honestly don't know, sorry.
And that is it for me and copyright discussion because it has been a long week and I got a game to prep for.