Forums > General discussion

WMDB's licensing problem - any lawyers in the house?

(1/4) > >>

CyberShadow:
Hi all,

There is an important problem that, as a community, we need to solve probably sooner than later.

After a map author uploads a map to wmdb.org, the map is then made available for viewing, downloading, and playing through services such as HostingBuddy (!map, !wmdb).

The problem: we (wmdb.org and other service providers) are not actually allowed to do any of those things with any maps uploaded ever. Why? Because the map authors never gave us permission!

Pragmatically it is obvious - why would someone upload a map to wmdb.org if they didn't want people to download and play on their map? However, pedantically, that's how it is.
In most jurisdictions, every creation is copyrighted by default, and no copies (this includes transmission over network) may be made without the author's permission.
As such, technically speaking, there is nothing preventing someone from uploading their map on wmdb.org, and then saying "Why are you distributing my map? I never gave you permission!" and then taking legal action against us.

Another reason for why we should try to solve this problem is that at some point wmdb.org may be succeeded by a better service, which integrates directly into the game.
For this to become a reality, we need to have all our paperwork straightened out and be sure that we are legally allowed to redistribute uploaded maps.

So, there are two parts to this topic:

* We need to decide on a set of licenses, and make authors of all new uploads to WMDB choose one of these licenses.
This will give wmdb.org the legal right to redistribute them (i.e. make them available for download),
and for players to actually use them (host games with the map, or save them in replay files and then upload said replays online).

This will also be a good opportunity to allow map creators to choose how exactly they are OK with people using their maps, specifically for example if they want to allow remixes.

For this purpose, Creative Commons has a good set of licenses we can use: https://creativecommons.org/share-your-work/


* What to do about already uploaded maps?

The extreme but definitely legally correct approach would be to delete everything and ask everyone to re-upload their maps under a license of their choice.
Obviously we would probably lose a huge % of maps if we were to do this, so it would be much more preferable if we could solve this in another way.

An alternative would be to relicense the maps uploaded so far, as follows:


* We implement part 1 as above, so all new uploads past a certain date are under a proper license.
* We begin a transition period of some duration, such as 1 year, for converting uploaded maps to a proper license.
We will need to make this transition as public and obvious as possible (i.e. affected maps will have a banner on their pages, and we will try to contact the authors by email about it.)
After the transition period expires, we assume that the authors have had reasonable time to be notified and take action, and through their inaction, they allow us to distribute the map under the new license.
Of course, if authors disagree, we will remove the map, or look into additional licensing options if none of the ones we will have at the time will be agreeable.
* After the transition period expires, all maps are either at the new license or deleted due to the authors' wishes (which we hopefully will minimize).
If any authors change their mind after the transition period and want their map down, we can follow standard DMCA procedure.
Changing the license of content without each author's explicit approval is legally iffy, but fish much bigger than us got away with it:


* MediaWiki made the contents of Wikipedia and its other sites available under a second license in 2009:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Licensing_update


* StackExchange changed the license of user contributions from CC BY-SA 3.0 to 4.0:
https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/333089/stack-exchange-and-stack-overflow-have-moved-to-cc-by-sa-4-0
Note that this change was very sudden, without any prior discussion or warning, and thus was poorly received by their community.
The license itself that we choose for this would probably have to be as restrictive as possible while still allowing wmdb.org and related services to redistribute the map in all implied and technical situations.
If authors wish to grant the community more rights, they can always pick a less restrictive license later.
The remaining elephant in the room is maps which have a large amount of copyrighted artwork (from other games, cartoons/anime, etc.). I'm not sure what to do with it. I don't think it qualifies as fair use.

Any thoughts / opinions on the above? Especially if you are a map maker or are familiar with IP law.

By the way, I think TUS has the same problems, but it's not up to me how TUS wants to address them.

Kradie:

--- Quote from: CyberShadow on February 28, 2020, 07:53 PM ---The remaining elephant in the room is maps which have a large amount of copyrighted artwork (from other games, cartoons/anime, etc.). I'm not sure what to do with it. I don't think it qualifies as fair use.

Any thoughts / opinions on the above? Especially if you are a map maker or are familiar with IP law.

By the way, I think TUS has the same problems, but it's not up to me how TUS wants to address them.

--- End quote ---

I am not an expert on licensing but as longest author doesn't profit from the source material, it shouldn't be an issue? They are after all in low quality of 112 colors. Inferior to its intended purpose.

CyberShadow:

--- Quote from: Kradie on February 28, 2020, 11:04 PM ---They are after all in low quality of 112 colors.
--- End quote ---
This is a temporary technical limitation of the current versions!

XanKriegor:
None makes profit from making maps nor playing them. When someone uploads a map, the whole purpose is to make it possible for others to have them and play them. Who can complain about profit and distribution?

Cleroth:

--- Quote from: Kradie on February 28, 2020, 11:04 PM ---
--- Quote from: CyberShadow on February 28, 2020, 07:53 PM ---The remaining elephant in the room is maps which have a large amount of copyrighted artwork (from other games, cartoons/anime, etc.). I'm not sure what to do with it. I don't think it qualifies as fair use.

Any thoughts / opinions on the above? Especially if you are a map maker or are familiar with IP law.

By the way, I think TUS has the same problems, but it's not up to me how TUS wants to address them.

--- End quote ---

I am not an expert on licensing but as longest author doesn't profit from the source material, it shouldn't be an issue? They are after all in low quality of 112 colors. Inferior to its intended purpose.

--- End quote ---

Common misconception. Whether you profit or not is irrelevant. Copyright violations are copyright violations. You're not allowed to use someone else's copyrighted work.
Quality is also irrelevant. It's derived from the original work or bears enough resemblance.
Generally this kind of stuff would fall under fair use. So long as you comply with DMCA requests, it should be fine. Minecraft and such games also have loads of copyrighted works that can be downloaded.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page