[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

/vt/ is now archived.Become a Patron!

/tg/ - Traditional Games

View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 56 KB, 750x563, Thieving-Fuck.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
76643710 No.76643710 [Reply] [Original] [4plebs] [archived.moe]

What do you think /tg/?

If we used to play in an irregular group of geeks back then, switching Game Masters, games, settings, and having different players teams, who would be the owner of copyrights for our sessions' contents?

If someone replays old scenarios with new group, recording it and getting gratification from sessions streaming or if someone makes a webcomic based on collective player characters, or writes stories set up in someone else's campaign setting on their blog, would you expect them to reach out to each and every person involved and ask for permission to use their intellectual property? Truth is, ideas tend to mingle - sometimes one character gains traits and characteristics that were added by the GM or other players, sometimes a different GM would use existing setting from another one's campaign, involving stories built by other player characters configuration.

Would you say that there is an unspoken agreement between every participant that we own and share our collective intellectual property together? Equally? Is there more "intellectual value" in a campaign setting created by a GM, or in a character invented by a player? Would creating something new, based on others' ideas, without even asking them a dick move? What if it's a way of inputting your sessions' funniest moments, fond memories and a tribute to others' work, in something new that you're creating?

>> No.76643863
File: 18 KB, 367x388, 1268041191185.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

How fucking autistic are you?

>> No.76644046

Mildly, I hope.

I find calling "original characters" "intellectual property" using big words where they don't apply, but with how special everyone is nowadays, I'm just curious about general opinion..s?

>> No.76644284

>I'm just curious about general opinion..s?
Not the first poster but this is very autistic.

>> No.76644364

>would you expect them to reach out to each and every person involved and ask for permission to use their intellectual property?
Patent? Trademark? Copyright?
No? Therefore not legally enforceable and therefore no obligation at all. How on Earth do people develop these silly ideas about legalities?

>> No.76644611

So, let's say you enjoy a piece of someone's work, be it a story or artwork, and then learn that there is someone from author's gaming group, who feels unrecognized for using "their own ideas" from their games. Does this change your perception of previously enjoyed piece of work?

>> No.76644687
File: 83 KB, 444x561, 1517193466650.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I seriously can't tell if this is elaborate bait or if you're legitimately this fucking autistic.

>> No.76644759

What on has this got to do with anything? The OP talked about intellectual property rights, the term has a distinct legal meaning. There is no connect there with anything you talked about having lessened regard for a writer using someone else's ideas.

Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.