Game Ownership Ethics

[MichaelHopcroft]

There is a semi-unspoken rule in the community for VASSAL (an engine used mainly for wargames) that in an online or PBEM game of something, at least one player should own a copy of the game. That way the free modules aren't competing with the purchased boardgame. Additionally, modules will be pulled if a publisher requests it as a matter of course -- which means no legal action is required.

As a result, a very large proportion of active board wargame publishers actively support VASSAL.

Now obviously you don't need to buy a chess set to play Chess on TTS -- Chess after all has been in the equivalent of the public domain for centuries. But what if you see a module for a boardgame you like, in the Workshop for example. Is it ethical to download the content and use it in play if you don't own the game, or is it ethically OK as long as at least one player in a live playing does?

On one hand, content creators deserve respect, but a good playthrough will go a long way towards selling you on a game that can, in some cases, be a pretty hefty investment.

What does the TTS community think?

[Red Ethmoid]

I personally believe that if a group is playing a copyrighted game, even if no one owns it, and they aren't making any money from it, I don't see the harm. And I realize that it can still be considered copyright infringement even if there is no profit making off the product. I think whether its ethical or not has to be based on the severity of the damage its doing to the copyright holder.

I can't think of a single company, PC game or otherwise, that shut its doors because too many people were pirating their software. Its a victimless crime. If someone's going to do it, the most ethical thing I think, is to keep that fact to themselves, without rubbing it in anyone's face. There's always going to be a fraction of society that will find a way to use products for free or cheap, regardless of how legal/ethical it is.

Most people will pay for movies, TV, books, games, etc, to ensure that studios, publishers, and so on will stay solvent. The miniscule amount of people that will leech of their products are too negligble to do any lasting harm. At worst, its unfair to the paying customer. But so are a lot of things.

[isu-kun]

Originally posted by Red Ethmoid:

I can't think of a single company, PC game or otherwise, that shut its doors because too many people were pirating their software.

I can. I've worked for a couple of studios that dropped out of the game market for this exact reason, so it's not a victimless crime.

Originally posted by MichaelHopcroft:

Is it ethical to download the content and use it in play if you don't own the game, or is it ethically OK as long as at least one player in a live playing does?

You're not going to get a really concrete answer to this question. TTS isn't like Vassal, it's a for profit project, so many publishers are going to be weary of freely available mods of their games. If there is a possibility of them making a deal with Berserk, they aren't going to want people copying the game and making it freely available, regardless of what they may have in their physical library. I think the issue really comes down to availability, though. If you own the game and make your own mod for private use with you and your friends, that's really not something they can regulate and you do technically own the game. Extend that copy to the workshop, though, and then you're kind of moving out of that ambiguous gray area of legality and the publisher has a right to have the game removed. Since they mostly don't want the games on the workshop, I'd say it's pretty safe to assume they don't want you downloading them, either.

Although it really depends on the game and the publisher. Some may be more lax on these things than others.

[Red Ethmoid]

Which studios were those isu-kun?

[isu-kun]

The main one was Animax, which used to keep people on staff for making in house games. They mostly relied on ad revenue for those games, but had issues with people redistributing the games without the ads. They still do some work on games, but only for outside contractors at this point.

[Personal Finest Shawn]

When it comes purely to physical board game remakes I can't see how this can do anything but get them more sales. I have tried a few games I don't own to play with friends in other countries, but when I have friends over to my house I'm not going to tell them to all buy a copy of tabletop simulator and bring their computers. It just doesn't make any sense when I can buy the physical game to play which is easier.

This only allows you to play them with people who aren't in the same room, which wasn't possible before so it's not really a lost sale. Then those people buy the home game to play at home. It's a win win.

[loneXolf]

Personally i don't see the problem with playing copyrighted games tabletop simulator. Physcial and digital copies of the game each have diffrent uses. Phsyscial for real life/digital for playing with people across the world. Sure it is wrong we can pay nothing for a digital copyrighted game that a fan scaned but i think it is because of a flawed system. steam workshop/saving to chest/downloading files. Is the only way we can get a digital copies of those games. Let give you a example :Should i buy a pay over 200 dollars for all sets of munchkin to sit on a shelf and do nothing , because i have no use for them in real life. I would galdlylike 60 dollars for a digital copy but the system is flawed. They added a dlc for superfight witch i think is a great idea for payment for copyrighted games.

[Polyester™]

Originally posted by isu-kun:

Originally posted by Red Ethmoid:

I can't think of a single company, PC game or otherwise, that shut its doors because too many people were pirating their software.

I can. I've worked for a couple of studios that dropped out of the game market for this exact reason, so it's not a victimless crime.

As you did explain later, I will not ask for a citation.
As for your example, it's the company's fault for allowing better versions of their games to be played. Yes, better, without the ads.
The ones on the workshop are worse, as they have a butload of problems, such as lag and the like.
Keep in mind this.:

Priacy is almost always a excuse devs use when they're game is not selling well, as it can't usually be measured, like some dev blame steam refunds for they're decreased sales.
Citation: (For the second half of the comparison.)
TotalBuiscuits: Devs Speak Out on Steam Refunds (Here, he speaks of devs blaming steam refunds for hurting them, while they make shoddy games)
(Youtube links are being stupid and not working, you need to search it up yourself.)
I am firmly with a free workshop, the publishers of this game have no responsibility for whats on there if they claim so, and the workshop creators are not violating free use (technically).

[RikJenMattic]

Because of Tabletop Simulator, I have actually bought a load more board games than I had done for years!

[isu-kun]

Originally posted by Son of a Baldwin:

When it comes purely to physical board game remakes I can't see how this can do anything but get them more sales.

Easily, board games can be quite expensive and there are people out there willing to sacrifice the social aspects of physically meeting to save $200+ on a board game and it's expansions. And its not a case of "they wouldn't buy it, anyway" as i know a lot of people with the disposable income who would buy them if a free alternative were not available.

Originally posted by Me™:

As for your example, it's the company's fault for allowing better versions of their games to be played. Yes, better, without the ads.

Actually, no, that wasn't the case in my example. First off, how do you stop someone from simply taking something you make and posting it for free? That's kind of the downside of the digital age, you don't have any choice in that matter, so it's not "allowing" someone to pirate your IP. There will always be someone who's willing to rip you off and reverse engineer any sort of protection you implement.

Second, it wasn't a case of people choosing a superior version, it was a case of people choosing a better known source. It's basically the equivalent of an artist putting up a picture they created and then having another, better know artist slap their name on it and get the credit. I should have specified better, there, the pirated copies were also making money through ad revenue, just not the ad service we were using.

[Polyester™]

Originally posted by isu-kun:

Originally posted by Son of a Baldwin:

When it comes purely to physical board game remakes I can't see how this can do anything but get them more sales.

Easily, board games can be quite expensive and there are people out there willing to sacrifice the social aspects of physically meeting to save $200+ on a board game and it's expansions. And its not a case of "they wouldn't buy it, anyway" as i know a lot of people with the disposable income who would buy them if a free alternative were not available.

Actually, it can often be a case of "they wouldn't buy it anyway" as not everyone has the capability of buying a expensive boardgame. I am a example of this, and bought Tabletop simulator so I could play more boardgames.
I mean, Superfight costs as much as any triple A game on steam, no way i'm spending that much for a few hundred cards.

As for your dliema with the company you mentioned, piracy from main sources (Piratebay and the like) don't really use a monetary assentive to make money off your work. Copyright was made for your problem, and you really should have put your works on as many popular sites as possible, but I agree that those people shouldn't have done it and i'm not trying to blame you here, but I must point out what you could have done to prevent it. I'm not a buisness expert myself, so maybe I shouldn't be dabblling in this.

In that case, they stole your work, and made money off it, violating copyright law, assuming you had your game copyrighted. Piracy does not usually result in people making money of said material, and distribute it around for free.

[isu-kun]

I'm not saying it's never a case of an individual not buying the game, but I see a lot of people who defend piracy by claiming it's ALWAYS a case of people wouldn't buy the game, anyway. I know for a fact that isn't true. I've seen many cases where people pirate games simply because they can and when they don't have that option in front of them, they pull out their wallets and buy them. To them, the product is worth the money, they'd just rather not spend it if they don't have to. Those are the cases that make the "nobility" of piracy fall apart.

They weren't my games, although I did some work on a few. The studio used to have a site where they hosted the games and they publicized it as much as they could given their size and means. Social media, banner ads, product tie-ins, etc. Many of the companies that make games are not as big or as rich as people think. Especially for the smaller upstarts and indies, it doesn't take much to kill them, even if their games are moderately successful. From what I understand, the board game market is even worse.

Unfortunately, even though the games were under copyright, there was no way to pursue legal action against the offenders. Many cases like this often involve foreign parties, which make it incredibly hard to do anything about it.

[mimizukari]

I have no use for physical board games, why would I buy the board games? Now with things like superfight, if they're of quality, I'll gladly pay for them (as I have bought the unlimited vers of superfight, had plenty of fun with it.)

There's no problem with using physical copies of board games digitally due to no profit being made from the publisher of the workshop mod, so I see no issue.

[MichaelHopcroft]

Originally posted by isu-kun:

You're not going to get a really concrete answer to this question. TTS isn't like Vassal, it's a for profit project, so many publishers are going to be weary of freely available mods of their games. If there is a possibility of them making a deal with Berserk, they aren't going to want people copying the game and making it freely available, regardless of what they may have in their physical library. I think the issue really comes down to availability, though. If you own the game and make your own mod for private use with you and your friends, that's really not something they can regulate and you do technically own the game. Extend that copy to the workshop, though, and then you're kind of moving out of that ambiguous gray area of legality and the publisher has a right to have the game removed. Since they mostly don't want the games on the workshop, I'd say it's pretty safe to assume they don't want you downloading them, either.

Although it really depends on the game and the publisher. Some may be more lax on these things than others.

This is not unprecedented even with the open-source VASSAL, as there is a wargame publisher called Avalanche Press that has taken a long time to decide that maybe online play might be a good idea after all. But even then they keep more control than other wargame publishers -- only a few games are available, and you can only download them from them (it's just like a purchase, but they do not charge). From a library of 50+ titles, you can currently only get VASSAL modules for three (with the latest added just this month). By contrast, modules for virtually all of GMT Games' 100+ titles are available for VASSAL, either from links on their store site (no checkout) or directly from the VASSAL module listing page.

There are TTS mods for many properties whose publishers have a lot of legal resources and corporate muscle. So does Valve, of course, but few if any Workshop content creators can say the same thing.