Prime Directive Traveller

[rust]

Depends on where the post is made and held I admit, but I assumed mongoose has England-based servers and hence English & Welsh law have some sway.

I doubt that a case Paramount vs. ADB in a US court over a license made
according to US law would cause someone to take a closer look at English
& Welsh internet liability law.

 

[mechascorpio]

+++ Deleted for forum peace +++

 

[Nerroth]

Over on ADB's BBS and Forum, their setting is already referred to as the Star Fleet Universe, or the SFU; the TV/movie setting run by Paramount/CBS is generally referred to as the "Franchise".



When it comes to specific stories, I would be wary of trying to rely too heavily on the General War; or any other major conflict for that matter. While there would of course be room for those kinds of stories, I would rather see a balance struck with what is referred to in GURPS Federation as something which is so implicitly a part of the legacy of the UFP, that "many in Star Fleet (and the government) consider it their true and primary mission or their highest calling"; exploration.


Indeed, the Federation sourcebook already has several plot hooks in the non-Federation worlds section; quarantined worlds, planets under the auspices of the Prime Directive, star-faring species that preserve their independence from the UFP, and so on.

Plus, there is the remit of the Second Fleet; the various survey cruisers operating (for the most part) in the largely-unexplored coreward zone of the UFP Trusteeship Territory, where not every new encounter has a ready-made answer.


Whether taking up one of the many options already hinted at in the source material, or cutting a new adventure/crisis/opportunity out of whole cloth, there should still be a way to make sure people can have "jaw-jaw" stories, as well as "war-war" ones.

 

[BFalcon]

+++ Deleted for forum peace +++

 

[BFalcon]

Freetrav: *As I understand it*, the ADB license allows use of the Franz Joseph technical manual and blueprints, themselves derivatives of the ST original series, but were never acknowledged, by Paramount, as being "canon", as far as I know, despite being the best source material an RPGer could ever have for that period. ADB are NOT allowed to even refer to the original series, any characters or the main ship by name.

This material formed the basis of the Star Fleet Battles game, but has since gone onto form material for Prime Directive, Federation Commander and other games set in the same universe, so is now referred to as the "SFU" - the Star Fleet Universe - to acknowledge that the game has now moved beyond the original game and now includes a wider range of products than the one or two games.

The SFU has gone from just before the original ST universe and followed its own historical path (including the original Klingon and Romulan treaties, included in the FJ manual) and inventing its own ships, only using the four ship classes included in the one technical manual. The SFU/STU difference is explained more in the ACTA forum in the Star Fleet thread.

I think that Jean is probably playing it safer than she needs to, but it's usually safer than crossing the line.

 

[Jean]

Please realize that I am not a lawyer. I have a pretty firm grasp from a user's end of copyright law and I've had to work with SVC with what we can and cannot have legally in our works.

If it has already been used in the the Star Fleet Universe, it is assuredly safe to use anywhere.

If it has been used in a book series (one of the Paramount licenses), TV series other than TOS or TAS, or a movie, we cannot use it unless they borrowed from us.

If "it" is in TOS or TAS and we haven't used it yet, we cannot. If we have used it, then it is part of the SFU and safe to use.

Anything YOU invent is fair play. We've had the Peladine become a "known empire" and the Jindarians started out as a player creation. The Borak are currently under development. Just a few issues of Captain's Log back, a new space "monster" was discovered -- the Space Manta.

For us, the focus has always been on what we can do. We have to avoid the legal pitfalls of what everyone expects to be in "Star Trek" but we cannot due to "the license." And yes, that does mean watching the minis for things that people think are ok, but we cannot do and looking at art for things that we don't have the rights to use. But gamers, writers, and artists are talented and once they understand we can't do something for a good reason, they work with us. The license is a contract and as such, there are things in it that we are legally bound to do. As I have said, we focus on the positives and not the negatives.

I understand better now how much this disturbs the culture of Traveller players. I never meant to bring such divisiveness to the Forum and discussion and it makes me very unhappy to have created it. But somehow, we have to reach a happy medium whereby you feel free to create and we don't have to worry about breaking the "golden license." The best way for us is to have all that public creativity channeled into "safe" territory of TOS-style stuff that isn't strictly forbidden -- the pre-existing characters or adventures of that famous ship. And why should they have all the fun?

Again, what you do around your game table is your business. If you take the stats of NCC-1707 the USS Hood and use them for some other ship that may be quite famous, we won't know or care as long as it doesn't come to our attention. We don't patrol the Internet looking for that sort of thing -- we're a small company and have a lot to do that consumes most of our time. But seeming to promote it by allowing our fans to publish it on official boards would be questionable enough that while it is most probably legal, the cost and time to prove it would be higher than we'd be able to risk. So, yes, we do play it very carefully and err on the side of caution. We are playing with the livelihood of Steve Cole, Leanna Cole, Steven Petrick, and Mike Sparks -- the full time employees of ADB. Personally, I don't want anything I do to ruin the lives of four people, not when it is so easily avoidable. They are living, breathing people, with lives and hopes and dreams and who deserve to continue creating their dreams so that we can enjoy sharing those dreams.

I feel sort of like I'm the happy puppy who just piddled on the living room carpet. I didn't mean to make a mess of your topic or to cause such stress between some of you. However, I feel confident that we can work together to get that ugly stain out and to finish decorating the living room.

Please, don't fight or leave this forum over something I have said or done or triggered. You all have good ideas to contribute -- remember that whole is usually greater than each of the parts. I find I learn the most from people with whom I disagree because they keep me intellectually honest with myself and make me evaluate my stance.

With respect to you all,

 

[rust]

I feel sort of like I'm the happy puppy who just piddled on the living room carpet.

No reason to feel that way.

You just had the bad luck to be the messenger who delivered some un-
welcome news. :wink:

 

[DFW]

Again, what you do around your game table is your business. If you take the stats of NCC-1707 the USS Hood and use them for some other ship that may be quite famous, we won't know or care as long as it doesn't come to our attention. We don't patrol the Internet looking for that sort of thing --

Which wouldn't matter anyway unless it was on a forum you owned. So, don't lose any sleep over it.

 

[IanBruntlett]

I understand better now how much this disturbs the culture of Traveller players. I never meant to bring such divisiveness to the Forum and discussion and it makes me very unhappy to have created it.

So far I've found your messages to be intelligent and sensitive. This forum contains a broad spectrum of Traveller fans, some more vocal than others - so please, please, bear in mind that some of us are just reading your posts and looking forward to getting hold of your books

 

[Renny]

Jean

I think you've been most respectful and restrained in your comments. I also feel you have explained quite clearly what is and is not acceptable, from the point of view of ADB, and understandably so. What I would like to know is the line from Mongoose on this. They seem to have been very quiet, and frankly, seem to have let you take a lot of flak.

 

[rust]

What I would like to know is the line from Mongoose on this. They seem to have been very quiet, and frankly, seem to have let you take a lot of flak.

What we have had so far was a (sometimes lively) discussion, but any
statement from Mongoose would probably be a more or less final deci-
sion, and I hope they will take their time to think this through and per-
haps also ask some experts (e.g. lawyers) before they come to a con-
clusion they consider acceptable for (almost) all members of the Travel-
ler community. There is still a lot of time before the first Traveller Prime
Directive book will be published, so no need to hurry.

 

[captainquirk]

It would be nice to hear from Mongoose. But basically it is going to come down to this - if Mongoose want to team up with ADB and use ADB's licenced product, then they have to abide by the rules that come with that product licence.

It doesn't matter how much anyone argues, twitches, moans, protests. The product has very specific licence terms, and neither ADB or Mongoose can afford to risk challenge due to contravention. By partnering with ADB, Mongoose is no longer independent so cannot claim that the ADB rules don't apply here. Mongoose are partners. So they get the responsibilities that come with the product as well as the opportunities.

As has already been stated any rich organisation can destroy a smaller one before a case ever gets to court. It doesn't matter which country you are in, justice is for the rich. Since ADB have already dealt with this once before, how about trusting that they know what they are talking about on this matter?

As Jean has said, it's more productive to get back to discussing what is going to be in PD: Traveller and getting it to be as much of what we want as is realistic and possible. We can quietly and privately add the Trek-ness to the PD basic rules ourselves and develop our own TNG and DS9. Quietly and unobtrusively. Which might mean hosting any of those necessarily unofficial developments elsewhere.

Arguing about this is just wasting time and space which could be taken up with talking to Jean about what will make PD: Traveller rock like no other version of PD has before.

 

[Jean]

Folks, here's the way I see it regarding me and this Forum.

It is far better for me to find out from you what the culture is of the players. I'd rather find the sore spots now than find them down the road and have them surprise everyone.

So let's continue down the path of what you would like to see in a couple of years (when I retire) in a semi-regular supplement. Let's go for generic RPG stuff that can be easily made game-specific.

 

[FreeTrav]

Please realize that I am not a lawyer. I have a pretty firm grasp from a user's end of copyright law and I've had to work with SVC with what we can and cannot have legally in our works.

::some deletia:: This is a good plain-language guideline for us to understand what to expect from ADB/Mongoose. Thank you for this.

As I understand it, then, what ADB is saying really amounts to "We cannot do this, so you should not be seen to be doing it." Again, the key phrase is "be seen to"; your contractual agreement with Paramount cannot be held to bind us, unless PD/t ends up with a special separate license between ADB/Mongoose and the customer, similar to most software licenses (which have been held, though not conclusively, to be essentially unenforceable).

Similarly, unless your contract with Paramount specifically requires it of you, you are under no obligation to police any fanac other than that which occurs in contexts that ADB has direct control over - and that only to the extent that it violates your license, not any general violation of Paramount IP (though I do believe, from what you have said, that one cannot actually violate Paramount IP while still remaining within the terms of the ADB contract). However, if you have established a pattern of doing so, that may well constitute legal precedent, and thus obligate you to continue to do so.

::It should be noted that my comments above are not so much to educate Jean as to clarify some of the issues for other participants in the forum whose lay understanding of the legal issues may be less clear than mine (and I make no claims as to the clarity of mine). In fiction writing, this is called "As you know, Bob...". I do invite correction and re-clarification from those whose legal knowledge exceeds mine.::

The approach described above, however, will almost inevitably lead to two layers of fanac - that which can be seen, and is "legitimate", and a second layer of what might best be described as самиздат, /samizdat/ - something which I feel is a sure indication that there is a fundamental conflict between the community ethos - and not just the Traveller community ethos; I'd bet that there's a fairly extensive самиздат network already extant for Prime Directive in other systems - and the Paramount corporate view of what constitutes "fair use". (This also gets into one of the places where I have a fundamental disagreement with method; I feel that with the repeated extensions and automatic renewals, the entire idea of copyright has been perverted practically into the opposite of its original intent. That, however, is not an argument for this thread - or arguably for any RPG forum, as most forums seem to have a rule - written in some cases, unwritten in others - that one avoids discussion of real-world religions or real-world politics.)

Anything YOU invent is fair play.

"Invent" is, at least here, a bad word. It leaves unclear the status of borrowings from material not covered by or relevant to the ADB/Paramount agreement. For example: If I have explicit permission from an author of a non-Star-Trek SF novel to incorporate his very interesting aliens into a role-playing game and share the result, is it permissible for me to insert them into my PD/t campaign, and then write about it/them in Freelance Traveller? I would guess that the intent of your statement would be that I can - but I didn't INVENT those aliens. Similarly with crossovers from other Traveller settings - I'm tired of samurai cats; I want pirate puppies. Can I bring in the Vargr from the OTU and then write about how I did it in Signs & Portents? Again, I didn't INVENT them. I'm not going to rely on my guess concerning your intent; I consider myself to have an interest in being right, so I may be reading MY intent into yours, incorrectly.

For us, the focus has always been on what we can do. We have to avoid the legal pitfalls of what everyone expects to be in "Star Trek" but we cannot due to "the license." And yes, that does mean watching the minis for things that people think are ok, but we cannot do and looking at art for things that we don't have the rights to use. But gamers, writers, and artists are talented and once they understand we can't do something for a good reason, they work with us. The license is a contract and as such, there are things in it that we are legally bound to do. As I have said, we focus on the positives and not the negatives.

I don't feel that the Traveller community is really going to be all that different, in those respects. I doubt that we are even really any more vehement about our disagreement/disappointment than other communities; it may simply seem that way if it's been a while since Prime Directive "broke into" a new market.

In a way, I think this discussion is more about the Traveller community trying to understand the limits than it is about hostility to the idea of limits. That's not to say that the hostility doesn't exist - the limits do, to some extent, feel like they're fundamentally opposed to ... something ... deep in the "heart" of Traveller. Look at some of the well-established Traveller forums and websites, where you'll inevitably find a discussion (more like a plethora of discussions) of "influences on Traveller" and "influences on how you play Traveller", where the participants discuss a very wide range of books, movies, TV shows, et cetera - both predating and postdating the creation of Traveller.

I understand better now how much this disturbs the culture of Traveller players. I never meant to bring such divisiveness to the Forum and discussion and it makes me very unhappy to have created it.

Stop. Right. There. Yes, it is disturbing to the Traveller community culture. But the divisiveness you see, you neither brought nor created. Again, go look at the established forums, including the archives of the Traveller Mailing List (and its spinoff lists, if you can find them). Trust me, we've had this sort of flap before, just discussing different versions of Traveller. And some of those discussions got so flame-ridden that it makes this thread look like a kumbayafest. Don't beat up on yourself for discovering something which has been part of the Traveller community for almost as long as ADB has had the license to do PD!

But seeming to promote it by allowing our fans to publish it on official boards would be questionable enough that while it is most probably legal, the cost and time to prove it would be higher than we'd be able to risk. So, yes, we do play it very carefully and err on the side of caution. We are playing with the livelihood of Steve Cole, Leanna Cole, Steven Petrick, and Mike Sparks -- the full time employees of ADB. Personally, I don't want anything I do to ruin the lives of four people, not when it is so easily avoidable. They are living, breathing people, with lives and hopes and dreams and who deserve to continue creating their dreams so that we can enjoy sharing those dreams.

Jean, please contact me OFF THE FORUM at editor@freelancetraveller.com. This statement, WHICH I HAVE NO QUARREL WITH, appears to have implications for Freelance Traveller's potential coverage of PD/t.

I feel sort of like I'm the happy puppy who just piddled on the living room carpet. I didn't mean to make a mess of your topic or to cause such stress between some of you. However, I feel confident that we can work together to get that ugly stain out and to finish decorating the living room.

Such imagery! Our carpet is no less clean than it was before you came in, and you didn't make a mess of any topic, nor cause any stress that wasn't already there. At most, you've come in to a clubhouse, and started discussing American microbrew beers, when one of our favorite agree-to-disagree-even-though-we-discuss-it-continually topics is whether English, Dutch, German, or Belgian beer is best. What you've done is added something new to the mix, and now that we've realized it, we'll be happy to go hammer-and-tongs at it, same as we do with the older topics.

It may seem odd... but I think that when you get right down to the bottom of things... you've been welcomed to the club, and accepted as a member.

Now... when do we get to see PD/t, and who's going to review it for S&P and/or Freelance Traveller and/or RPG.Net?

 

[rust]

@ Jean

It is perhaps also not always obvious why we ask the questions we ask.

In Free Trav's case ADB's policy could influence the way how he has to
deal with Traveller Prime Directive in his Freelance Traveller fanzine.

In my case I am thinking of my German "home forum", which has a ra-
ther well used download section with more than 2,800 downloads, many
of them contributions from fans who created material for their favourite
games and wanted to share it with others.

While this forum would be out of ADB's and Mongoose's legal reach, be-
cause our laws are quite liberal when it comes to fair use of games, I do
not want to step onto someone's toes with anything added to the public
download section, and therefore I want to understand what is acceptable
and what would be seen as unacceptable.

So, it is not an attempt to torture you in any way, just curiosity with a
background.

 

[zero]

Such imagery! Our carpet is no less clean than it was before you came in, and you didn't make a mess of any topic, nor cause any stress that wasn't already there. At most, you've come in to a clubhouse, and started discussing American microbrew beers, when one of our favorite agree-to-disagree-even-though-we-discuss-it-continually topics is whether English, Dutch, German, or Belgian beer is best. What you've done is added something new to the mix, and now that we've realized it, we'll be happy to go hammer-and-tongs at it, same as we do with the older topics.

^ This. I havent posted here since the whole "wait, we have to rp SFU, not TOS?" thing started as I frankly hate writing essays as my old uni lecturers could attest to! :lol:

I'm on the fence on whether I want this supplement, being very honest.

Why? It seems the SFU has a very set continuity and expectations, which is scary to a SFU newb like myself - I know Star Trek, but this SFU isnt that. But then again, I play Traveller and dont even use the 3rd Imperium setting, I just use the rule-set for my own games. I'm sure in the privacy of my own home if my SFU is a little more like Star Trek and I dont have to change too much (seems like the TLs already deal with the TOS era if not note-by-note what it is) I can live with that.

But still, I have my Chthonian Stars setting and I'm happy with that, it works, it aint broken and I'm having hard scifi fun. PD: Trav seems to me an impulse buy atm - like this;

"ooh! Star Trek traveller!"
*opens book*...
"aww..."

I realise this has nothing to do with the devs and is more to do with me knowing the source material over the true setting of the supplement, of which I know little to nothing.

I'll leave this post by saying I am intrigued by this release and would like to know more, but so far all this thread has shown me is that I'm dealing with a rules-lawyer setting of a generic spaceship game, and this game due to being based off something I have no experience with, when at first I thought I did, means I may give it a miss if I'm right, all I want to know is if there is enough in the supplement that I can do homebrewed Star Trek rpg in the privacy of my own home.

Damn, wrote an essay anyways... :roll:

 

[Jean]

zero, my email system went wonky and refused to talk properly to Steve and Leanna, so I had to do some serious work on it. Unfortunately, that meant my system of keeping a "to do" list went kerfluuey.

I'm working on getting up a free, short introduction to the SFU that will be in PDF form and a free download from e23. It would be about 8 pages and include the "What Is d20 Modern?"m "What is Prime Directive?", "The Star Fleet Universe", the geography and history of the SFU, "Intelligent Life in the Star Fleet Universe", "Eras of the Star Fleet Universe", "Some Mysteries of the SFU", and a list of some of the species found in the SFU. It should be enough to make you dangerous and to let you see that "The Main Era" (which is only about 59 years long) contains the period that TOS was set in: Y156-Y159.

It may surprise people to find there were long periods of peace between the Klingons and Federation -- and that trade was welcomed. SFB tends to focus on war; I think that PD focuses more on what was "normal:" exploration, development, and discovery as well as crisis management and response.

Will that satisfy your needs?

 

[Jean]

FreeTrav, I think what I am saying is "We cannot do this; our fans cannot do this on any official boards." We cannot expand our license through the "back door" of fan publication. If you want to stat out a Borg Cube for your personal game, that's fine. We cannot allow those stats on an official board or publication. The first part is for your personal enjoyment; publishing it (either through us or by a fan) is considered to be "publishing things prohibited by the license" and is a major "Thou Shalt Not" handed down by Paramount.

Let's say that you got permission from Author A to put the Tdasadngs in as a species from his popular series "The Tdasadngs on the Go!" We'd want to know that the permission did exist. We've learned through time to verify -- it could be Author A meant for your personal campaign and didn't want the Tdasadngs in the SFU messing around with the Lyrans and Kzintis.

rust, does that help with your understanding of the situation?

FreeTrav, indeed, on our Forums, we don't allow people to discuss politics. The Political Swamp is inhabited by Ally and Allie, my pet alligators who live there and who collect the feet of our board members who wander in ... :shock:

 

[locarno24]

You might even think about including "war diaries" written in the context of a few protagonists, A Vulcan trader, a Federation Marine, a Klingon Scientist and so on ?

'War diaries' would probably make a good format for (short) campaigns, when the war is being seen through the prism of an RPG rather than a wargame.

Without mentioning that-which-shall-not-be-discussed-for-the-sake-of-forum-peace, there is a reason that stitching scenes together with narrated extracts from a ship's journals became standard practice; it works very well.

And yes, love to see the 'other side'; gunrunners supplying independent worlds, pirates looking to make a living without being snapped up by the orions, traders, itinerant doctors and engineers, etc, etc.

 

[rust]

"We cannot do this; our fans cannot do this on any official boards."

Just to make sure: "any official boards" translates into "the boards of ADB
and Mongoose only" and does not cover any other boards, so there will
not be any attempt at a "cease and desist" if someone puts up his version
of a Borg cube for Prime Directive Traveller on another board ?