I just sent The Long Arm of the Hutt, as well as some character sheets, off to Fedex for printing a nice full-color copy but, shortly after submitting them, I received a call from Fedex stating that they could not print off the documents due to copyright. Anyone run into this?

If Fantasy Flight provides them as PDFs, aren't we allowed to print them off for our gaming sessions? A digital character sheet doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

They asked me to sign a waiver stating that I had express permission to print these documents and I don't wish to be sued; any thoughts?

The bottom of page 2 explicitly granted permission to print for personal use. As long as you're not printing out a few dozen copies it should be obvious it is personal use.

Per the second page of the LAotH PDF:

© 2012 Lucasfilm, Ltd. & ® or TM. Used under license to Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG Logo are trademarks and/or registered trademarks of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. All rights reserved to their respective owners. PERMISSION GRANTED TO PRINT OR PHOTOCOPY ALL PAGES OF THIS BOOK FOR PERSONAL USE

The people you're working with are, for lack of a better term, dumb. Find a different printer.

Edit: I take two minutes to grab a direct quote and get beaten to the punch. I am going to go bite my pillows.

They're likely just doing their due diligence, given that, technically, them charging you for printing the PDFs would be them making money off the printing of copyrighted material, which therefore means they'd be breaking copyright, because they're printing it commercially.

The disclaimer would actually only apply to you printing it off yourself for your own personal use.

It's silly, but that's how it is with copyright law.

*has a degree in Law, and a Masters in Intellectual Property Law*

The chances of anyone being sued or taken to court over it, however, are slim to none.

I was going to reference the page at http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_news.asp?eidn=3809 where it refers to the “… the free downloadable adventure …”, etc….

I was going to reference the page at http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_news.asp?eidn=3809 where it refers to the “… the free downloadable adventure …”, etc….

It being free doesn't actually change a thing when it comes to a company printing something commercially for a customer - copyright applies regardless, which means they'd need express permission to be allowed to do it, otherwise, theoretically, FFG could take Fedex to court for printing their product and charging for it.

I print mine off a FedEx, but I use the printer kiosks inside. They're slower, but you don't have to deal with the human factor.

They're likely just doing their due diligence, given that, technically, them charging you for printing the PDFs would be them making money off the printing of copyrighted material, which therefore means they'd be breaking copyright, because they're printing it commercially.

The disclaimer would actually only apply to you printing it off yourself for your own personal use.

It's silly, but that's how it is with copyright law.

*has a degree in Law, and a Masters in Intellectual Property Law*

by that logic toner companies would be liable. No the disclaimer also applies to you taking it to a place like kinkos and printing it. That is part of the reason for the disclaimer.

They're likely just doing their due diligence, given that, technically, them charging you for printing the PDFs would be them making money off the printing of copyrighted material, which therefore means they'd be breaking copyright, because they're printing it commercially.

The disclaimer would actually only apply to you printing it off yourself for your own personal use.

It's silly, but that's how it is with copyright law.

*has a degree in Law, and a Masters in Intellectual Property Law*

by that logic toner companies would be liable. No the disclaimer also applies to you taking it to a place like kinkos and printing it. That is part of the reason for the disclaimer.

Incorrect, as you aren't paying the toner company to carry out a service for you (in this case, printing the PDFs) - you're buying their product (the toner) to use as you wish (to print off the PDF yourself).

You might disagree, but some companies take copyright seriously, and you paying a company to print off copyright works for you, even if 'printing for personal use' is allowed, is still a technical breach of copyright, as Kinkos/Fedex/etc are being given money to print out copyrighted works.

"For Personal Use" is a very specific permission, as it allows you to personally print or photocopy a copy of the PDF for yourself. It doesn't give Fedex, etc, the right to accept money to print it for you (which would come under copyright theft, aka piracy).

Millandson brings up a good point, looking at from the end of a slippery slope (which copyright lawyers have to do) the printer could be seen as making a commercial profit from the popularity of something not meant to be commercially profited upon.

Now, we all here know that one person printing a PDF still counts as personal use, but the printers know the copyright holders won't always see it that way (and they do have to put their foot down sometimes to avoid setting a precedent for permitting bigger stretches of copyright).

Still, the point stands that if the people at your printer wont print this for you, you'll have to print it through people who will or take it to a printer without people.

printing for personal use means one or 2 copies. not 100 copies. But then I always do the printing my self if possible. As sometimes the people get overzealous.

printing for personal use means one or 2 copies. not 100 copies. But then I always do the printing my self if possible. As sometimes the people get overzealous.

Then character sheets are useless. I don't know about you, but how many groups do you know only need 1 or 2 copies of the character sheet for the whole group? By this definition, then half the group would need to buy the book to have enough copies to cover 1 or 2 copies per person... and they'd only get to play 1 or 2 characters ever... Personal use means that it is for you and you alone that you're using the material in question.

Guys, I’m married to a lawyer. She’s actually in the next room right now, working on stuff for one of her clients.

She’s also the most intelligent and most reasonable person I know. Well, most of the time — we are married, after all.

Sadly, I think that MILLANDSON is right on this topic. Companies like FedEx really, really don’t want to get hit with copyright violation lawsuits, and so they will tend to go way overboard on handling anything that could potentially smell like that.

Heck, I would bet that the refusal to handle the materials, and the requirement to get an indemnification, are handled by an automated system and there aren’t humans involved in making that judgement call.

So, as stupid as it seems, the answer here is either to sign the paperwork they request, or take your work elsewhere. I don’t see any viable alternatives.

I feel like the quantity you are printing wouldn't have any bearing on whether or not the sheets are intended for personal use. Wouldn't somebody get slammed with a copyright law only if they started selling the sheets? Even if you were selling the sheets, FedEx or any other printing service shouldn't take a hit, for they were just printing it out for you. That's like suing the sporting goods store for selling the baseball bat that some kid used to destroy your mailbox.

I feel like the quantity you are printing wouldn't have any bearing on whether or not the sheets are intended for personal use. Wouldn't somebody get slammed with a copyright law only if they started selling the sheets? Even if you were selling the sheets, FedEx or any other printing service shouldn't take a hit, for they were just printing it out for you. That's like suing the sporting goods store for selling the baseball bat that some kid used to destroy your mailbox.

Or going after a gun shop that sells a firearm to someone that becomes a mass murderer... But that happens.

FedEx is selling their services, which in this case is printing your sheets. The exception for “personal use only” doesn’t apply to them, since they are not going to be using the sheets in question.

So, they are theoretically liable for violation of Intellectual Property law. It doesn’t matter to them that the probability of being prosecuted is virtually zero in this one specific case, what matters is the sum of all the probabilities if they don’t take a “zero tolerance” policy.

So, they take a “zero tolerance” policy, and they don’t have to worry about being sued or criminal charges filed against them for violations of Intellectual Property law. The only consequences that occur have to do with who chooses to bring what business in the door.

When you mix math and the law, things can tend to get way wacky.

Read up on the Trans-Pacific Pact and what that is doing to international copyright law, and the kinds of things that Hollywood is trying to get people put in jail for. That’s the end of the spear that FedEx is trying to avoid having pointed at them.

I feel like the quantity you are printing wouldn't have any bearing on whether or not the sheets are intended for personal use. Wouldn't somebody get slammed with a copyright law only if they started selling the sheets? Even if you were selling the sheets, FedEx or any other printing service shouldn't take a hit, for they were just printing it out for you. That's like suing the sporting goods store for selling the baseball bat that some kid used to destroy your mailbox.

You're paying them for printed copies - they are selling you the sheets.

I've run into this issue. As a blind reader, I try to get books printed into formats that work for text-to-voice and I've run into IP laws often enough. That happened with the EotE core rules, in fact.

Argue all you like about IP laws. The only simple thing you can say about them is that nothing about them is simple. Don't ask me to even try but Millandson is saying the same stuff I've heard over and over despite my making the same arguments (and more). The rules get more and more complicated as the copying tools get better. Imagine what complicated laws 3D printing might bring about as that technology improves.

They just want you to sign their waiver so that their hands are clean. Staples does the same thing - a little checkbox that says 'I hereby declare that I have the right, blah blah blah...'

Just sign it and enjoy your module.

Imagine what complicated laws 3D printing might bring about as that technology improves.

Fabrication Rights Management is going to be fun...

Once they get the detail fine enough and have the home fabricator finally licked, it's going to get interesting really really fast. Entire nations that have built their economy on cheap injection molded junk are going to be pressuring each other to pass laws to protect their factories...

On the bright side if anyone can print out their own plastic trinket, the happy meal toy may become obsolete, though McDonalds will then have to sell it's food on the merits of it's food...

Imagine what complicated laws 3D printing might bring about as that technology improves.

Fabrication Rights Management is going to be fun...

Once they get the detail fine enough and have the home fabricator finally licked, it's going to get interesting really really fast. Entire nations that have built their economy on cheap injection molded junk are going to be pressuring each other to pass laws to protect their factories...

On the bright side if anyone can print out their own plastic trinket, the happy meal toy may become obsolete, though McDonalds will then have to sell it's food on the merits of it's food...

Or switch back to the tiny beanie babies.

You guys might poo-poo Kinkos all you want, but businesses take this stuff serious like you wouldnt believe. I went to print a portrait - something I myself has shot - and the business (Walmart or Target - one of those big box stores) said no. "It's a professional print".

"No, I shot it myself. There is zero copyright coming into play here."

"Impossible. It looks too good. It came from a studio."

Eventually I wound up going to Costco where they hooked me up no problem. But it was my first (rather flattering) taste of corporate paranoia about IP.