Hyperlinked Rules

[Missouri_Rebel]

Here are the RaW made more user friendly. The changes are as follows;


Fully working Bookmarks for every rule, expandable.

Table of Contents links to rule

References in rules links to the corresponding section

Highlighted rule headings

Highlighted examples

Underlined and bold text important headings

Fully linked index (not complete)

Note that NO RULES WERE CHANGED and the only thing done was to make it more user friendly and easier on the eyes.

http://www.mediafire.com/view/?3ysb71egjfb657q

mo reb

[Sewerlobster]

+1

This is great.

[Missouri_Rebel]

ORIGINAL: SewerStarFish

+1

This is great.

Enjoy. Something to use until the real deal comes out.
Note: You can use on the links in the table of contents by clicking directly on the text.

mo reb

[Extraneous]

[:D] NICE [:D] You can read it with Adobe.

NOTE: this is my opinion of the Hyperlinked-RAW-7mAug2004.pdf only.

[Missouri_Rebel]

ORIGINAL: Extraneous



NOTE: this is my opinion of the Hyperlinked-RAW-7mAug2004.pdf only.

[:D]

[Extraneous]

I need to answer that way for a very good reason.




I'm Not trying to get on anyones nerves or make fun of anyone.

[Missouri_Rebel]

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

I need to answer that way for a very good reason.




I'm Not trying to get on anyones nerves or make fun of anyone.

Oh we know. It's all good. Heck, we're all here for the same reason and as far as I am concerned any disagreement previously aired is water under the bridge.

mo reb

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: Missouri_Rebel

Here are the RaW made more user friendly. The changes are as follows;


Fully working Bookmarks for every rule, expandable.

Table of Contents links to rule

References in rules links to the corresponding section

Highlighted rule headings

Highlighted examples

Underlined and bold text important headings

Fully linked index (not complete)

Note that NO RULES WERE CHANGED and the only thing done was to make it more user friendly and easier on the eyes.

Good job, very nice.
But there is one thing that confuses / worries me.
You call the file : "Hyperlinked-RAW-7mAug2004"

But, RAW7m is one thing, and RAW7-aug-04 is another thing.

RAW7m is from 8th May 2003 and was Released at ADG's Website only in electronic format.
RAW7-august-04 is from August 2004 and was Released at ADG's Website only in electronic format.

Here there is a list of differences :
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid= ... mI5YmU0ZDY

Which one have you taken as the basis of this file, RAW7m, or RAW7-aug-04 ?

Also, why was the link removed ?

[Missouri_Rebel]

ORIGINAL: Froonp


Good job, very nice.
But there is one thing that confuses / worries me.
You call the file : "Hyperlinked-RAW-7mAug2004"

But, RAW7m is one thing, and RAW7-aug-04 is another thing.

RAW7m is from 8th May 2003 and was Released at ADG's Website only in electronic format.
RAW7-august-04 is from August 2004 and was Released at ADG's Website only in electronic format.

Here there is a list of differences :
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid= ... mI5YmU0ZDY

Which one have you taken as the basis of this file, RAW7m, or RAW7-aug-04 ?

Well I wasn't really sure. These are the same rules as posted by Cad98 in this thread, post 6.

tm.asp?m=3189818



Upon reviewing the docs you posted it appears they are in fact the RAW7-august-04 rules.

Also, why was the link removed ?

I received a PM from another forum member who stated they were the only person permitted to post the RaW rules and that he had an exclusive privilege in those regards. He asked that I remove them so I did. It appears, from another PM, that that was not necessarily correct and that his agreement was for another aspect apart from RaW.

I certainly was not trying to step on anyone's toes and assumed that since the rules were already posted to this forum in no less than 3 other places and, in fact, these are merely highlights and bookmarks of one such document, that there was no harm in sharing what I had been messing with.


I've posted the link again and if no one objects I will leave it up.

mo reb

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: Missouri_Rebel
I received a PM from another forum member who stated they were the only person permitted to post the RaW rules and that he had an exclusive privilege in those regards. He asked that I remove them so I did. It appears, from another PM, that that was not necessarily correct and that his agreement was for another aspect apart from RaW.

I was unaware that we had such an eminence on our forums. [&o]

[Anendrue]

I attempted to keep this quiet and professional. However a statement claiming exclusivity is untrue. Therefore I must defend myself. I told him...

No disrespect intended here. But, did you get permission from ADG to do this. I ask because as far as I know I am the only one with permission from ADG and MATRIX to publish RAW and/or RAC online. If you do not have permission I am asking you to remove the link and remove the online file until you have recieved formal permission from ADG and MATRIX.

• Publishing RAC is against the ADG copyright per their website.
• I am not an attorney but clearly this seems to violate ADG's rights in many respects.
• No claim of exclusivity was made, nor was that term employed by myself in any respect.
• In an effort to maintain my own rights I privately contacted Missouri_Rebel and suggested he remove the link until such permission was recieved from the appropriate companies.
• Generally someone else did it is not an acceptable court defense as far as I know.
• The copyright from ADG follows.

COPYRIGHT INFORMATION:

America in Flames, World in Flames and all their components and kits, in both their electronic and printed forms, are

Copyright 1985 ~ 2002, Australian Design Group.

Permission is hereby granted to copy these rules (if any such are available on this website) electronically for your

personal use only, provided that they are copied in their entirety (including this message). Any deletion or alteration

or on-selling, without the express written permission of Australian Design Group, is a violation of domestic and

international copyright law.

Please refer questions and comments to:

Australian Design Group
PO Box 6253
Los Osos, CA 93412 USA

@Patrice
Your sarcasm is uncalled for and calls into question your attitude.

*edit for spelling

[Extraneous]

ORIGINAL: Missouri_Rebel

Also, why was the link removed ?

I received a PM from another forum member who stated they were the only person permitted to post the RaW rules and that he had an exclusive privilege in those regards. He asked that I remove them so I did. It appears, from another PM, that that was not necessarily correct and that his agreement was for another aspect apart from RaW.

I certainly was not trying to step on anyone's toes and assumed that since the rules were already posted to this forum in no less than 3 other places and, in fact, these are merely highlights and bookmarks of one such document, that there was no harm in sharing what I had been messing with.


I've posted the link again and if no one objects I will leave it up.

mo reb

[:D] It wasn't me that sent ya a PM [:D] (Whoot, not guilty for a change)



Patrice has to be sarcastic he's French.

J/k about Patrice having to be sarcastic.

[Cad908]

abj9562,

I pointed Mo Reb to the file in question. As below, typing "WIF raw" into a google search will get you its location. As near as I can tell the website was last updated on June 10, 2005. The document on ADG's website does not include any of the illustrations or graphics, as was noted.

I did not cite the website's author, Patrik Manlig, as I do not know if he indeed created the revised RAW. The RAW was "published" on January 9, 2005 by someone who is speaks French, given the date header on the PDF. I do not know if the author of the revised RAW received ADG's permission to do so. However, it is clearly now in the public domain. The revised RAW clearly is an alteration to ADG's product, and if it found the document offensive should have had it taken down. So, does Mo Reb need the permission of ADG and the mystery author, or just ADG's? Does indexing a revised document constitute a "deletion or alteration or on-selling" ?

I am not trying to be a jerk about this, but I am an indirect party in the process. I respect Harry Rowland's product and would do nothing to infringe on his copyright.

-Rob

[Anendrue]

As I told Mo-Reb after recieving clarification from Steve, the publication of RAW from its original form is between him and ADG/Harry Rowland. I have recieved specific permission from ADG and Matrix for the use of copyright materials (can not say why due to NDA). I respect that Mo_Reb intended this as a contribution to the community as did you. I would also ask you along with Mo-Reb to follow Harrys copyright notice in order to protect the game according to ADG's desires according to their copyright notice. After all why would we want to dilute the copyright protection afforded ADG for a game we enjoy.

As to your public domain assertation... I am no lawyer , but that seems to be a legal question subject to ADG's decision on how to defend its copyright.

[Orm]

This could be easily solved. Why not ask ADG and Harry for permission?

[Anendrue]

EXACTLY!

ORIGINAL: Orm

This could be easily solved. Why not ask ADG and Harry for permission?

[Missouri_Rebel]

Well I guess my redneck side is coming out but this is screwed!

First, I didn't mention your name when replying to Froonp about why I deleted the link. You stated that as far as you knew you were the only one permitted to post RaW, as stated by this 'as far as I know I am the only one with permission from ADG and MATRIX to publish RAW and/or RAC online.' I respected your unproven wishes and removed the link and kept your identity secret. That should be clear. Is it not?

You then tell me that you were wrong in another PM abj9562 so I reposted the link. I have done nothing to harm you. Heck, I even took your suggestion about purchasing a WiF product to play VASSAL with. Obviously I respect your position.

And Cad, I didn't mean to drag you through the mud. I really didn't. I appreciate your help in posting that link.

Forget it all. It's really not worth it. I buy a lot of games here at Matrix but have never seen a forum so eager to go after one another. I'm done. Keep with the wargame snobbery and here is your avatar pic back.


mo reb

[paulderynck]

I can see by your coat, my friend,
you're from the other side,
There's just one thing I got to know,
Can you tell me please, who won?

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

I can see by your coat, my friend,
you're from the other side,
There's just one thing I got to know,
Can you tell me please, who won?

Warspite1

What in the name of Bonaparte's balls is going on here??

[Anendrue]

ORIGINAL: Missouri_Rebel

Well I guess my redneck side is coming out but this is screwed!

First, I didn't mention your name when replying to Froonp about why I deleted the link. You stated that as far as you knew you were the only one permitted to post RaW, as stated by this 'as far as I know I am the only one with permission from ADG and MATRIX to publish RAW and/or RAC online.' I respected your unproven wishes and removed the link and kept your identity secret. That should be clear. Is it not?

You then tell me that you were wrong in another PM abj9562 so I reposted the link. I have done nothing to harm you. Heck, I even took your suggestion about purchasing a WiF product to play VASSAL with. Obviously I respect your position.

I never stated you revealed me. You claimed I said I had exclusive rights which precludes other from its use. I do not have that. I requested you get permission to use someone else's work and remove the link until that permission was recieved.

The 2nd and 3rd PM's you are referring to.

Let me start by saying I am not a lawyer or attorney and am therefore only giving my slightly educated opinion. Putting copyrighted material online is considered an act of publishing in most countries. Therefore before placing any material online I asked for specific permission from both companies due to their contractual obligations to each other. I recieved permission from ADG and Matrix to use their copyrighted material with speciic permission for RAC and RAW in the building of a web site to be released slightly before game publication. A hyperlinked RAW and RAC was in the original design for the site because it is needed as you know.

I'm not trying to be a pain but you are stepping on some potential monetray income for MATRIX, ADG and myself. I can not demand the removal as I do not own the publishing rights to those materials. However, I am strongly suggesting you recieve permission before someone gets bothered.

Received clarification on RAW usage from Steve. Its usage is to be determined only by ADG. In his understanding they have been fairly loose in their protection of the copyright on RAW. So what you so with RAW is between ADG and yourself. However RAC is definitely off limits per my agreement with Matrix, ADG, and Steve. So if you repost the link it is your responsibility good or bad. Sorry for any confusion this may or may not hace caused.

I never said I was wrong just that use of RAW is between you and ADG not Matrix.

And Cad, I didn't mean to drag you through the mud. I really didn't. I appreciate your help in posting that link.

Forget it all. It's really not worth it. I buy a lot of games here at Matrix but have never seen a forum so eager to go after one another. I'm done. Keep with the wargame snobbery and here is your avatar pic back.

Cad no one is uset at you or Mo_Reb for that matter. I just asked him to get the appropriate permission needed according to ADG's copyright statement.

mo reb

To all others I am sorry this blew up. However, we do not have the right to take other people's work and do what we will. Making games, running websites and writing software for games is a business and must be treated as such. This is not about snobbery. It is about legal protections affored by law and custom throughout the world.