Map Making and Copyright

[timerover51]

I have been busy the past few months working on some material for another game, but also working with the map editor for Civ3. I have not tried using Qunitillus editor as yet. Basically, what I am doing is making maps of the various planets in the Future History universe of H. Beam Piper, using whatever description he gives in his books as a guide, and then when nothing is there, using my imagination. It has been interesting.

What I was wondering is if there are copyright issues with Firaxis over using their editor to make maps for another game. The maps would not have map grids on them.

I also have been trying out the worlds that I have been creating, and that has been fun as well. I am not sure if I prefer the editor for Conquest or Play the World better, but the advantage to Conquest is that it has additional terrain like volcanoes and marsh.

 

[Quintillus]

IANAL (I am not a lawyer), but I don't see why there would be. The editor itself is copyrighted - you can't distribute copies of it, or create a derivative of it and distribute that without Firaxis's permission, but I don't see any terms in it (just checked the About and Help in the editor as well, though not the Conquests installer files) that say you can't use the files it creates in any way you want. And that's generally how most software works unless otherwise specified - once you buy the product you can use what you create with it however you like. Occasionally there are exceptions - the Unity game engine, for example, has an option where it's free, but you have to give a certain % of any game sales you create with it to its developer - but I would be pretty confident that since there are no conditions made known to the user when using the editor (and assuming it isn't a pirated copy), there would be no grounds for a copyright issue even if Firaxis cared about its editor being useful in creating maps for a different game. I'm also doubtful they would care; if anything it would seem to be positive publicity.

It wouldn't surprise me if there is some precedent of doing this in certain genres of games; in particular it wouldn't surprise me if this has occurred in the first-person shooters of the '90s and 2000's. At the very least I would expect there have been conversions made from an earlier game to a newer (and likely at times competing) engine, which would thus indirectly fall in the category of using one game's editor to create maps that wound up in a different game. And, as long as the original map wasn't one released by the developer of the first game, I can't see there being an issue. So... if you were starting from one of the Firaxis
Conquests scenarios, they might care and have a case about creating a derivative work of something they copyrighted to benefit a competitor, but as it sounds like you're creating an original map, I again suspect you are in the clear. Alas, I'm not familiar enough with the map-creating communities of these older games to point to specific examples, but I'm sure there are Doom, Quake, or other game veterans out there somewhere who could point to examples of maps that were at least partially created in one game's engine and then moved to a competing engine.

 

[timerover51]

Greetings, Quintillus, thanks for the reply. I was assuming that if would work a bit like Photoshop with respect to creating new material. I understand that the maps for the Conquest Scenarios would be under copyright, but as I am working on new science fiction worlds, I an not so much worried about them. I may still check with a friend who is at the Library of Congress who handles copyright just to be sure.

If I post any to the Forum, may I still claim copyright, or is the assumption that the maps posted are effectively shareware, and no copyright?

 

[Quintillus]

Well, I think the working assumption at CFC is that unless posted otherwise, others are welcome to create mod-mods of your work, and so forth. There is of course some expectation of giving credit - if you make a relatively minor mod to someone's map, it's considered good practice to give credit - but unless otherwise stated, my understanding from observing the forums over the past 10 years is that most contributions are open for freely creating derivative contributions. If you would like to be a little more protective of the rights on a map/scenario you make, I'd recommend stating that upfront in the first post where you share it, and high enough in the post that someone is likely to see it (2nd/3d paragraph).

This may be something to ask about in Site Feedback; what I mentioned above is based on my general observations (including some cases where authors have made certain request for derivative works), but I couldn't point to a specific CFC policy for it.

In general I've personally become more permissive with my contributions over time. From a practical standpoint, I've realized that the likelihood of founding a company or making any appreciable degree of money (or otherwise being able to sustain myself) on any of my contributions is unlikely, and from a philosophical standpoint I've slowly leaned more towards "it may as well be open to any contributions, what's the benefit to it being restricted, particularly as I might be hit by a bus tomorrow?". Thankfully thus far I've avoided contact with the bus, but in general I'd encourage sharing as openly as possible unless you really do see a serious possibility of a commercial enterprise emerging from your work.

I do understand that there is generally an implicit copyright on works of your own authorship unless otherwise waived, but your friend at the Library of Congress can likely give more specifics on that. Within CFC, the norm I see is that mod-mods are generally allowed unless the initial author requests them to only be permitted with specific permission, but that does seem to be more based on community norms than any particular legal doctrine, and there is an acceptable way to bow out of that (via requesting otherwise upfront) if so desired.

 

[nick0515]

What Quintillus has already said is all common sense and the way things work at CFC in practice.

Also not a lawyer (but I am a Librarian - ), but my take would be that it's the Firaxis artwork (the terrain graphics) you will be using, albeit created in the editor. The artwork, like everything else is automatically covered by copyright unless otherwise released in the public domain or given another form of copyright such as a creative commons license.

However, if you are only using the artwork for your own purposes it probably doesn't break copyright. Redistributing it and or selling it probably would. Quite a lot of what happens on this forum probably technically breaks copyright. Eg.reusing artwork from other games without permission of the copyright holder. I'm not sure about US copyright law but New Zealand copyright law has the vague and not properly defined concept of 'fair use' which in practice means people can use copyrighted material for their own purposes but should not undermine the ability of the copyright owner to make a profit from their copyright or redistribute it. Eg, you can copy a part of a book for research but not copy the entire book because you should buy the book so that the copyright owner can make a profit. What you are describing would seem to fit within the context of fair use for what it's worth.

In short it's probably fine.

I would think a good practice for modders creating new artwork (not reusing other artwork) would be to release it under a creative commons share alike type license that allows for modification and sharing but with attribution and requires it be shared with the same license.

 

[timerover51]

What I probably will do to be safe is check with Firaxes.