Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Tekumel] Re: Tekumel Foundation Website

Expand Messages
  • Alva Hardison
    great idea Peter! ________________________________ From: Peter the Explorer To: tekumel@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, March 29, 2013
    Message 1 of 108 , Mar 29 9:30 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      great idea Peter!



      From: Peter the Explorer <hamchuck.1234@...>
      To: tekumel@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Friday, March 29, 2013 6:12 AM
      Subject: [Tekumel] Re: Tekumel Foundation Website

       

      You know, the thought just occurred to me that now might not be a bad time to create an official Steve Jackson GURPS Tekumel module.

      My understanding, through rumors only, was that at one time SJ Games were very interested, but the professor, having been burned in the past, was overly wary of copyrights and such and negotiations broke down because of that.

      Now that the Tekumel Foundation owns the rights, perhaps it might be time to re-open discussions.

      Such a project would get the name "Tekumel" out in the public eye and in game stores again. Also it might offer one easily used solution to the problem that Tekumel is an RPG game with no available rules thus making it very awkward for anyone to actually pick it up and play it. And, my understanding is that various people (Brett Slocum, for instance) have basically already written a GURPS Tekumel adaptation,

      Peter Huston


      --- In tekumel@yahoogroups.com, Alva Hardison <alvahardison@...> wrote:
      >
      > yes malcolm. so it dies. alas.
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > ________________________________
      > From: Malcolm Heath <malcolmpdx@...>
      > To: tekumel <tekumel@yahoogroups.com>
      > Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2013 5:35 PM
      > Subject: Re: [tekumel] Tekumel Foundation Website
      >
      >
      >  
      > Oh, I know I shouldn't do this, but I kind of feel like I have to say at least something.
      >
      > The important point to bear in mind is that _we_ do not own Tekumel.  Professor Barker did.  Now his estate does.  The Foundation was established by Professor Barker to do the things he wanted with his life's work, which clearly included protecting his intellectual property.  This isn't a land grab, this isn't a cabal of people trying to keep Tekumel pure, or anything of the sort.  The Foundation is attempting to the best of their abilities to comply with the wishes of the creator and owner of Tekumel.  
      >
      > We may, between ourselves, agree or disagree with the situation here.  But we don't actually have a say of any kind.  Professor Barker did, and his opinion, and the expression of that opinion via the Foundation, which is composed of people who knew him well, discussed these issues at length with him, and I believe have ONLY the desire to see Professor Barker's wishes be observed, do.  His wishes are the ONLY thing that matters here, that has any standing whatsoever.  And that's the end of it, for me at least.
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > 2013/3/28 Steve Foster <Steve@...>
      >
      >
      > > 
      > >If you think that message was hostile then you are doing me a disservice. I have been a fan of Tekumel since 1977. I would hate to see it wither away through an overprotectiveness that stifles rather than supports. The problem is that this is precisely what I think will happen.
      > >
      > >
      > >I know the folks at the Foundation have the noblest of intentions and this is merely an amicable disagreement, but I have to ask what threat the Foundation's policies are protecting it from? Tekumel is not Super Mario. There aren't hordes of pirates out there producing cheap imitation scenarios. In fact, I wish there were as it would be a wonderful sign of interest.
      > >
      > >
      > >If it were my decision, and I know it isn't, I would forget IP protection. I'd get people to produce as much Tekumel material as they liked and do what they liked with it. I'd keep "Foundation Tekumel" as a premium brand for canonical Tekumel. If people like Tekumel, they'll buy that stuff.    But a fan base stifled by lawyer talk and fees and conditions is only going to shrink, and the IP problem will go away because there won't be anyone to buy anything.
      > >
      > >
      > >Would I open source Tekumel? Absolutely yes.
      > >
      > >
      > >Steve
      > >
      > >Sent from my iPad
      > >
      > >On 28 Mar 2013, at 02:34, George Hammond <worldsmith@...> wrote:
      > >
      > >
      > > 
      > >>
      > >>On Mar 27, 2013, at 7:00 PM, Alva Hardison wrote:
      > >>
      > >>> Does anyone know if what is covered in the below post has changed?
      > >>
      > >>Wow. Alva, do you think maybe you could pick a more hostile message to quote? I don't think we've quite got enough anger, sarcasm, and Godwinning on the list right now.
      > >>
      > >>I guess what you meant is, has the Foundation updated or changed their posted policies since they posted their website? Not on the web as far as I can tell.
      > >>
      > >>At UCon last October the president of the Foundation (Victor Raymond) reported that the Foundation had employed an intellectual property lawyer to advise them on their policies and on the many contracts that Dr. Barker had entered in to. Victor also shared a handout with revised language for their policies. I confess I don't now recall specifics of what was said about these, but my impression is that they were working drafts of revisions that would would eventually end up on the Foundation website. As it turned out we didn't have too much time to discuss them. I don't know what their plans are now. I hope they can update their site soon.
      > >>
      > >>George
      >



    • Brett Slocum
      Okay, now I think we can move this discussion offlist as John Till suggested. ... Brett Slocum
      Message 108 of 108 , Mar 29 9:48 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        Okay, now I think we can move this discussion offlist as John Till suggested. 

        ---
        Brett Slocum <slocum@...>


        On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 11:43 AM, Alva Hardison <alvahardison@...> wrote:
         

        Brett, thank you!! that's my entire point! I've been heavy handed in this journey into "ranting" as others have pointed out off list. A little "glasnost" (russian: openness) would go far in alleviating the situation. That is why i remarked to victor that they (the foundation) need to openly post any new guidlines (rumors say they exist) as i and others would VERY much like to see them Be above board and the good will from that action will pay off big.



        From: Brett Slocum <brett.slocum@...>
        To: tekumel@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Friday, March 29, 2013 9:18 AM

        Subject: Re: [tekumel] Tekumel Foundation Website

         
        There must be a middle ground between open source and heavy-handed licensing -- a way to protect the work of Professor Barker while at the same time promoting Tekumel through the production of new works. How to walk that line can only come from the Foundation. We can attempt to aid them by giving them input, but as those entrusted by the Professor to carry on his work, it's their job to make that decision. The authors looking to create new products will be the final arbiters of how successful the board has been at navigating these waters. If no one is willing to play by the rules set out, then those rules will hopefully change. Ranting at them is probably not the best way to advise them in their difficult path. There's got to be a better way to convey your concerns. 

        I am concerned that the confusing verbiage that caused such an uproar three years ago is still in place. One can easily conclude that nothing has changed. So, in essence, the fact that the Foundation website hasn't changed is cause for Alva and others to be alarmed. 
        ---
        Brett Slocum <slocum@...>




      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.