Diplomacy Scanning
Jody R. Gould '94
from the judge. It's not plagiarizing if the organization is being
credited with the information and its rights. And besides, I suspect that
if they don't know about it all they would do is ask for some kind of
payment (either monetary or otherwise) since the judge and diplomacy via
the internet _are_ good publicity tactics. If you start playing the game on
the judge most likely you are going to want to buy the board game. I know
a lot of people who have gone out and brought the game because of the interest
that judge diplomacy gave to them...
Jody
David Kovar
state of the Internet Diplomacy hobby, the judges, the general
prohibition of electronic copies of the AH rules, the good PR we
generate, etc etc etc. I'm waiting for a reply from them and will
let everyone know what they say when it happens.
Essentially, I'm working on establishing a good relationship with AH
for the Internet Diplomacy hobby and ask that people assist in
developing this relationship by not doing anything that might piss AH
off. Thanks!
-David
Timothy Ferguson
Perhaps your copyright laws are different, but in Australia I believe
copying is permissible so long as it is not for personal profit. Could
Sean clairify this point please?
Timothy Ferguson
Christopher Davis
JRG> Oh come on. Avalon Hill is on every map and every single thing that
JRG> I get from the judge. It's not plagiarizing if the organization is
JRG> being credited with the information and its rights.
Not being plagiarism (an academic offense, not a legal one) does not make
it not copyright infringement.
JRG> And besides, I suspect that if they don't know about it [...]
They do know about Internet Diplomacy. Read the FAQ sometime; it's all in
there. All about how Ken Lowe got permission to put maps and such online,
provided that the rules were *not*.
Buy the rules, at least, folks. They're only $5. You don't have to go
bust buying the Deluxe Diplomacy set (Mediterrranean!).
--
* Christopher Davis * <c...@kei.com> * (was <c...@eff.org>) * MIME * [CKD1] *
"It's 106 ms to Chicago, we've got a full disk of GIFs, half a meg of
hypertext, it's dark, and we're wearing sunglasses." "Click it."
Magnus Selhammar
the game.
Have they ever given any credit to the programmers of
the Judge? No.
Do they sell crappy software that don't even know the
rules? Yes.
Have they made new rules suited for ftf-play? No.
Do they advertise a deluxe set supposed to be much than
the old version? Yes.
Is the new deluxe version better? No.
Have they corrected the rule bugs, eg to convoy or not to
convoy? No.
If you do something incredibly stupid as posting the rules
on the net, they might sue you. But they will not prevent
playing by email. The Judges, this group and email dip is probably
equivalent with many dollars spent in advertising, and
they also earn many bucks due to the interest email give many
people.
I don't mind that Avalon Hill make money on diplomacy, even though
I think they should show more responsibility for the game. But
please don't defend them as if they just allowed us to play
just to be kind!
MagnusHave they made new rules suited for ftf-play? No.
p.s. When does the copyright expire?
David Kovar
>on the net, they might sue you. But they will not prevent
>playing by email. The Judges, this group and email dip is probably
>equivalent with many dollars spent in advertising, and
>they also earn many bucks due to the interest email give many
>people.
A couple points, some provided by a lawyer who's playing on Compuserve
and who has talked with one of the AH people there.
* AH probably doesn't make much money off of Diplomacy.
* AH probably hasn't figured out how to deal with their games running
in cyberspace. Since everyone in the world seems to be on an Internet
craze, I'll bet they're busy figuring something out.
* Ken Lowe has a written agreement from AH to run the judge on *one*
machine and to redistribute Diplomacy maps with the AH copyright on it.
* I have a letter in to AH updating the situation and asking for more
general permission.
* AH is liable, if provoked, to come down very hard on the Internet hobby.
It may not make a lot of money, but they'd not want to lose their
copyright. In such cases, it's better to overreact.
* They could easily write me a letter and tell me to stop running the judge,
stop distributing the software, tell them who else is running the judge,
etc. Unless you want to set up the David Kovar Legal Defense Fund, I'd
be forced to comply with them.
So please, don't turn this into anything major that forces them to act.
We leave them alone, they leave us alone.
-David
Mark Nelson
> Oh come on. Avalon Hill is on every map and every single thing that I get
> from the judge. It's not plagiarizing if the organization is being
> credited with the information and its rights. And besides, I suspect that
> if they don't know about it all they would do is ask for some kind of
> payment (either monetary or otherwise) since the judge and diplomacy via
> the internet _are_ good publicity tactics. If you start playing the game on
> the judge most likely you are going to want to buy the board game. I know
> a lot of people who have gone out and brought the game because of the interest
> that judge diplomacy gave to them...
Avalon Hill gave Ken *permission* to make the diplomacy map available from
the Washington Judge. They would take a *very* dim view of the rules
and map being made available by email: This might not be plagiarization
but it would be breaking copyrate.
AH do not share your enlightened (?) view on popularisation of the
game. They told Per Westling that he couldn't produce a Swedish
translation of the diplomacy rules to distribute within Sweden.
Let's respect AH's copyrate on the game and not distribute the rules
over the net.
Mark
Mark Nelson
>
> Avalon Hill does nothing for the hobby. They just own
> the game.
This isn't entirely fair. They have published three editors of
TGGTD, they have mentioned postal diplomacy publications reasonable
frequently in TG, they have had at least two issues of TG which contained
a stack of diplomacy articles and big plugs for the postal hobby which
generated a `large' number of novices entering the hobby and they have
kept the game in print. In addition several AH personal have attended
DipCon and contributed to postal zines. Rex Martin has tried to keep the
postal hobby informed of what AH is doing.
I would say that AH are doing *more* for the hobby than we have a right
to expect --- what do you think they should be doing?
> Have they ever given any credit to the programmers of
> the Judge? No.
Why should they give any credit to the programmers of the Judge?
> Have they made new rules suited for ftf-play? No.
Why should they? The rules of Diplomacy have remained the same
(with some clarrifications) for over 30 years. Changing the rules and
making diplomacy players buy new sets would be a good money earner, but it
wouldn't be very popular.
> Have they corrected the rule bugs, eg to convoy or not to
> convoy? No.
I am not aware of any bugs in the diplomacy rules. Perhaps you
mean features? 8-)
Mark
Rich Shipley
>Perhaps your copyright laws are different, but in Australia I believe
>copying is permissible so long as it is not for personal profit. Could
>Sean clairify this point please?
Copying for personal use is use is usually sanctioned, as well as "fair
use" which invloves parodies, reviews, and criticism (maybe even
answering rules questions!). I don't believe international copyright
laws allow one to publish another's work, even "at cost" or below. This
would lead to many abuses.
Rich
Magnus Selhammar
|> > From: "Jody R. Gould '94" <jrg...@EDU.COLBY>
|>
|> > Oh come on. Avalon Hill is on every map and every single thing that I get
|> > from the judge. It's not plagiarizing if the organization is being
...
|> AH do not share your enlightened (?) view on popularisation of the
|> game. They told Per Westling that he couldn't produce a Swedish
|> translation of the diplomacy rules to distribute within Sweden.
|>
|> Let's respect AH's copyrate on the game and not distribute the rules
|> over the net.
|>
|> Mark
They didn't allow it because if they want a Swedish translation, they
naturally want to make money on it, as with the French version. And
who can blame them for that? I just wonder why on Earth they don't do
it? They own a game as good as bridge, poker, chess or go, and certainly
the best multi player game ever made, and they don't do anything but
making a relatively small amount of money on it.
And from my curiosity. When does their copyright expire? Is it true
that there's a Japanese version of Diplomacy?
Magnus
masch...@cobra.uni.edu
> Avalon Hill does nothing for the hobby. They just own
> the game.
They just created and marketed the game - that's all. In effect Avalon
Hill started the hobby so many of us enjoy.
> Have they ever given any credit to the programmers of
> the Judge? No.
I don't know about this but the programmers certainly do deserve an abundance
of praise.
> Have they made new rules suited for ftf-play? No.
The original rules were designed for ftf-play. They suit me, and others,
just fine.
> Have they corrected the rule bugs, eg to convoy or not to
> convoy? No.
I agree with you here. There does seem to be some rather serious and illogical
rule changes made concerning convoys.
> If you do something incredibly stupid as posting the rules
> on the net, they might sue you. But they will not prevent
> playing by email. The Judges, this group and email dip is probably
> equivalent with many dollars spent in advertising, and
> they also earn many bucks due to the interest email give many
> people.
This is probably all true but why take a chance? They are allowing us to
play their game for free. Several netters do not even own the game yet,
because of the judges, can still play.
> I don't mind that Avalon Hill make money on diplomacy, even though
> I think they should show more responsibility for the game.
I am glad you don't mind the fact that Avalon Hill makes money, afterall they
are a business. I do not have a degree in business but I'm pretty sure
that businesses generally like to make money. How do you think they should
take more responsibility for the game?
>But please don't defend them as if they just allowed us to play
> just to be kind!
You are right. If they felt allowing Email Diplomacy to continue would hurt
their business they would not allow it. OTOH AH has the power to pull the
plug anytime they choose. We should at least appreciate the fact that they
haven't done this and do *exactly* what they request.
I own several other Avalon Hill games and think they are a fine company.
There is really no reason to berate them.
Tyler
Mark Nelson
> Content-Length: 439
>
> In article <5393.94...@amsta.leeds.ac.uk> you write:
> > AH do not share your enlightened (?) view on popularisation of the
> >game. They told Per Westling that he couldn't produce a Swedish
> >translation of the diplomacy rules to distribute within Sweden.
>
> them for not giving away something they don't own!
I believe that AH have world rights to the game. In some countries
they have allowed another company to distribute the game for them.
Mark
Mark Nelson
>
> In article <2qfnr0$o...@columba.udac.uu.se>, mag...@solaris.astro.uu.se (Magnus
> Selhammar) writes:
> > Avalon Hill does nothing for the hobby. They just own
> > the game.
>
> They just created and marketed the game - that's all. In effect Avalon
> Hill started the hobby so many of us enjoy.
I agree with your post (and disagree with Manguns) but... AH didn't create
the game (Allan Calhamer did) and they weren't even the first company to
market the game (GRI were). They didn't even start the hobby --- the postal
hobby had been in existance 14 years before AH started to distribute the
game...
> >But please don't defend them as if they just allowed us to play
> > just to be kind!
>
> You are right. If they felt allowing Email Diplomacy to continue would hurt
> their business they would not allow it. OTOH AH has the power to pull the
> plug anytime they choose. We should at least appreciate the fact that they
> haven't done this and do *exactly* what they request.
I find it hard to believe that AH can "pull the plug" on email
diplomacy given that they have made no attempt to "pull the plug" on
postal diplomacy for the last 17 year. However, I am not a lawyer.
Mark
Magnus Selhammar
This has been said before in this thread, but again:
There's no need for permission to run a Judge. Hence
AH "gave permission" to set up a Judge. Once again,
AH can not legally stop a person who runs a judge. What
he does is moderating, which is not illegal.
Avalon Hill has copyright on the rules, hence you are
not allowed to distribute it. In the AH-language, they
"didn't gave permission" to distribute the rules.
I have nothing against AH, they are a company that
sells a game and make money on it. They need you to
buy their products, so you don't need to be overly
nice. The custumer's always right?
Magnus
David Kovar
>There's no need for permission to run a Judge. Hence
>AH "gave permission" to set up a Judge. Once again,
>AH can not legally stop a person who runs a judge. What
>he does is moderating, which is not illegal.
Yea, but proving that in court could cost me, personally,
upwards of $50,000. I don't have that sort of money to blow
on the hobby, sorry. If you all want to put together a David
Kovar Legal Defense Fund when AH comes after me, fine. If not,
*don't piss off AH.*
>I have nothing against AH, they are a company that
>sells a game and make money on it. They need you to
>buy their products, so you don't need to be overly
>nice. The custumer's always right?
You don't need to be overly nice, but why not be nice anyhow?
Does it hurt you to do so.
-David
Magnus Selhammar
Ok, ok, I give in! It doesn't matter what's
right or wrong, or the fact that running a
Judge is a part of the freedom of speach. In
America money talks. You there should know
better than I.
Magnus