Hi Greg, Everyone
Greg, you have come up with a lot of good ideas in the last couple of days, some of which I am looking forward to programming, but in this post I want to challenge the sugggestion you make that the Deck Exchange is probably illegal, and especially for sharers and downloaders.
Personally, I am satisfied that the program is legally watertight, and has always been 100 ethical in that it only promotes, and does not detract from, the work of deck designers. When people see something they like they often go out and buy it. This is not just a hunch: when the previous Deck Exchange was running people were always posting on this forum how they bought such-and-such deck after first seeing here, and they wanted to let other users know about it, etc.
Unfortunately these testimonials were obviously not read by the publisher who threated to sue me, and after that happened (i.e. the threat), I decided to go with the P2P idea. It is obvious that by using P2P I am side-stepping the issue a bit, and I have shifted the risk towards the user, or really towards the Amercian users of the program. The copyright warnings I have put on the P2P tool are not just about covering my back end (as we database programmers like to call it), but also because I am really concerned that users might suffer some unexpected consequence from using the program, like getting sued by some publishing company or other.
It is a matter of recent history that the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) began to track down US citizens who had file-shared songs using P2P software and present them with punitive settlement claims, including costs. They could do this because when you use a P2P program, although you are personally anonymous, the modem or router you are using to connect is not anonymous. It has an IP address, and with a bit of effort another user of the program will be able to find that address out. This is true for all P2P software, including the Orphalese Tarot's P2P tool. By taking advantage of the legal situation in the USA the RIAA was able to take IP addresses and get account information, including street addresses, about users, by obliging their ISPs (such as AOL etc) to divulge these details under threat of prosecution. Thus they could know where to deliver the suit. This is no doubt quite astonishing to a lot of people outside the USA, but it is true. You can find out more about this subject on sites like
www.eff.org.
I have to say that I sympathise with the musicians that the RIAA was trying to protect, and I am sure some of them were appreciative of the RIAA's efforts in (indirectly) trying to safeguard their royalties. But music is a medium in itself. If I download a song I can play it on my music player and it is no different to owning a legitimately licensed recording. Music is transmissible over the internet. Tarot decks aren't. They don't fit down the wire. All you can send is a photo, and if people like the photo they will go and look at the original. If I had the slightest feeling or knowledge that I was hurting any tarot artist I would feel absolutely terrible. If I was breaking the law it would pale into insignificance besides that.
Anyway, Greg, I have thought about those kind of co-marketing ideas. It is all about numbers. It is really only about a year ago that Purple Scorp, Webweaver (and later joined by others such as Chriske - anyone heard from him???) and me were all trying to get publishers interested. They just weren't. I can't really blame them, because we are soooooooooooo small that any advantage from working together would be smaller than the cost of getting one person to work on it. If you log into the Deck Exchange you will see 15 to 30 users. The total number of individual users who logged in yesterday was 104. When I logged on to Azureus this afternoon to get the lastest installment of my favourite UK sitcom the number of users logged on was about 1,500,000. I reckon that when it is about ten thousand Orphalese users we can start approaching people with this sort of deal...Not so much a business plan, more of a pipe-dream .-)
What would really surpise you is the amount of stuff to do with quality control that we had going already when the first DE up and running. There was a committee of users co-ordinating together to get all the LWBs complete etc. This worked because for each deck there could be only one authorised version. there was no repetition. This repetion is an unfortunate aspect of any P2P system, there really isn't a lot one can do about it.
Anyway, I have already spent much longer writing this post than I expected, and now I have to go out. Keep the good ideas coming, dude, I have noted them all, and the bug reports
Cheers
Richard