User:Carlonwiki/draftCopyrightDBM

Copyright issues regarding the De Bellis Multitudinis Wargames Rule Set.

DBM for short is discussed elsewhere on the Wiki.

The purpose of this page is to present a platform for the discussion of various copyright issues pertaining to DBM. This page therefore does not deal with style, content and game mechanisms.

The salient facts are that DBM was co-authored by Richard Bodley-Scott and Phil Barker, both UK citizens. DBM was published by The Keep, a trading entity which supplied equipment to players of the game and had the DBM series published. DBM went through several published editions, namely DBM 1, DBM 2, and DBM 3.

The authors have fallen out. Richard Bodley-Scott was responsible for the last version of DBM, now generally known as DBM 3.1. DBM 3.1 was never formally published. Instead the '3.1 amendments' were released informally over the web, with players/owners expected to edit their own DBM 3.0 rule books. So no published version of DBM 3.1 exists anywhere. Richard Bodley-Scott appears to have abandoned DBM completely with the publication of the Fields of Glory (FOG) rule system. The FOG system is so substantially different from DBM that no continuity can be perceived. FOG is a formally published rule system.

Phil Barker has abandoned DBM and did not collaborate in the creation of the DBM 3.1 amendments. Phil Barker has embarked on the De Bellis Militum Magistrorum (DBMM) rule system. Although DBMM is seen by some as a continuation of DBM proper, it is stated in the introduction to DBMM that it follows a 'blue sky approach' and uses extensive new rule concepts, terminology and new definitions. It appears from DBMM that its author intended it essentially not to be a continuation of the DBM system, but rather the creation of a new and improved rule system. DBMM is now a formally published rule system.

DBM 3.1 can not be puchased. Its authors appear to have abandoned it and there is no known publisher who publishes the rule set.

This creates the essential copyright question: is DBM3.1 now in the public domain?

Copyright is analogous to plagiarism, but should not be confused with it. Nobody can claim to have written (or invented) DBM other than its authors. DBM players will always be indebted to Richard Bodley-Scott and Phil Barker for their contributions. However, copyright holders are entitled to royalties for the reproduction of their works. The essential questions here are - (a) if the copyright holder has ceased to exist, does any duty to collect and pay royalties remain? and (b) if the rule system has in fact now become part of the public domain with no cost reproduction does the copyright holder, if any, suffer patrimonial damage?

The conclusion of the above seems to indicate that - it should be possible to publish a 'free' version of DBM3.1. - it should be possible to place the text of DBM3.1x in a wiki type environment for sustained communal editing and free download.

comments