Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
22 Posts

The Lord of the Rings: The Card Game» Forums » General

Subject: Hi-res images of cards? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
David Troutman
msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
When I print out one of the octgn scans to use as a proxy, it prints out kinda blurry and/or pixelly.

Are there any larger-sized player card scans available for printing proxies of core cards? The errated cards on the files section are plenty big, but I cant find official card scans that are that size.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Thanee
Germany
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Well, obviously that is not what FFG prefers, but you can probably find what you are looking for here...

http://www.cardgamedb.com/index.php/index.html

Bye
Thanee
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Troutman
msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
Certainly it's not what they prefer, but if I can find a way to not spend 35 bucks on 13 cards, I'm going sure going to try. I just want them to not look like crap.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Martin Smith
United Kingdom
Pimlico
London
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
http://ffgapp.com/qr/MEC01
7 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rob Rob
United States
Tampa
Florida
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Oh, don't forget, FFG released the back card art as well.


2 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Simon Gingras
Canada
Sorel-Tracy
Qu├ębec
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Flamehearted wrote:

Slightly off topic, but are the scans found there good enough to use in CardWarden?

Thanks.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Williams
Scotland
Elgin
Moray
flag msg tools
mbmb
Have FFG given permission for this?

If not, it seems to me that printing off their cards (or in fact reproducing them in any way, without their permission) is a fairly blatant copyright infringement.

You could proxy with some other LotR card of the same type (so the back matches) and just use a china marker on the front to indicate which card it is proxying for. This would be functionally identical but without reproducing FFG artwork etc.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Troutman
msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
Well I'm not buying 3 core sets. Also, just printing the bottom doesn't give all the necessary information, and having artwork displayed that doesn't match the proxy creates initial confusion when the card is drawn, especially for players who don't know it's only supposed to be a proxy.

In my view, it's one thing to wholly print out adventure packs without buying them. It's another to acknowledge that the rules allow for up to 3 of each card in a deck and that there is no official Core Set Supplement Pack. The only sensible alternative then to buying a whole extra card game just for 13 pieces from it, without spending almost exactly the same amount as the whole game by buying them from a third party, is to print out full-front proxies.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Martin Smith
United Kingdom
Pimlico
London
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I could be wrong, but I did wonder if FFG had put these high res scans out there on the understanding that they probably would end up on Octagon, used as proxies and so on. If not, it's more than a little naive to expect no-one to use them for these purposes.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Williams
Scotland
Elgin
Moray
flag msg tools
mbmb
While I understand why the core set composition results in some people feeling they are somehow entitled to print their own cards, and while it would be nice if FFG followed the ideal path of releasing an upgrade pack for the core set, neither of those have any bearing on whether it's legal or not.

Neither does the fact some websites etc have digital versions and show them in public. Those sites may or may not have FFGs permission, in most cases we don't know. I believe they have an agreement with OCTGN and also heard FFG are taking over CardgmeDB. Other card databases may have their permission because FFG feel it is in their long term benefit to have such databases available to their players. They give conditional permission such as "once a pack is released for 6 months" and so on.

So certain online sources using/displaying the cards may or may not have permission, but in actuality whether they do or not has no bearing on whether it's legal for others (i.e. us) to take advantage of their presence by printing our own cards.

It doesn't surprise me at all that people do it. What surprises me is how people do it in full public view. If people really do think FFG don't mind, then simply ask FFG for permission, they will say "Go ahead", and there's no problem. Right?

If FFG really don't mind, then they would surely have no problem saying so publicly. They might even put the images on the FFG site for us to use, so they get any advertising traffic etc. But if they don't give permission, then this is surely an infringement. Seems pretty simple really.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Williams
Scotland
Elgin
Moray
flag msg tools
mbmb
Chyron8472 wrote:
Well I'm not buying 3 core sets. Also, just printing the bottom doesn't give all the necessary information, and having artwork displayed that doesn't match the proxy creates initial confusion when the card is drawn, especially for players who don't know it's only supposed to be a proxy.

In my view, it's one thing to wholly print out adventure packs without buying them. It's another to acknowledge that the rules allow for up to 3 of each card in a deck and that there is no official Core Set Supplement Pack. The only sensible alternative then to buying a whole extra card game just for 13 pieces from it, without spending almost exactly the same amount as the whole game by buying them from a third party, is to print out full-front proxies.


I understand your reasoning, but I think this is a fairly clear case of rationalising something you know you probably shouldn't be doing, and this rationalisation allows you to do it without feeling like you're doing anything wrong. We all do it sometimes, it's feature of being human!

If you think FFG don't mind, it's not hard to ask them. I'm curious what their reply would be.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Troutman
msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
Orion3T wrote:
[q="Chyron8472"]I understand your reasoning, but I think this is a fairly clear case of rationalising something you know you probably shouldn't be doing, and this rationalisation allows you to do it without feeling like you're doing anything wrong. We all do it sometimes, it's feature of being human!

If you think FFG don't mind, it's not hard to ask them. I'm curious what their reply would be.
Yes, and while I'm at it, I might as well ask video game publishers whether they don't mind I used to rip disc images of games I owned to my HDD so that I could play them without needing the disc inserted. Or maybe I should chastise many a person I knew when I was a kid who couldn't afford to pay 50 bucks per movie in 1980's dollars and so made the occasional copy from a rental. (Yes, I know that /that/ is piracy, but I'm not doing that. I already own the cards. I just want a few more of some of them for my own use and don't want to pay out the nose for it.)

No, FFG /would/ rather I bought 3 core sets, but I have a problem with feeling like I have to pay 90 bucks or more in order to play my card game properly. 2 core sets, sure, maybe. Not 3. If they had an offical core supplement I would up and buy it, hands down, no questions asked.

So before I ask them if it's okay to make decent looking proxies, maybe you could ask them to make a core supplement so that I don't feel obligated to make proxies at all. Heck, while they're at it, they could also make an errata card pack.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Williams
Scotland
Elgin
Moray
flag msg tools
mbmb
I'm not chastising - do whatever think you can get away with, however your conscience dictates. Makes no difference to me, that I'm aware of.

I am simply pointing out that what you're doing is probably an infringement, and that if you care whether it's an infringement or not you could easily ask the copyright holder.

It actually wouldn't surprise me that much if they are OK with it; as others have pointed out, they seem fairly relaxed in letting their cards be imaged online. So I don't see why it's not worth asking. For all I knew when I asked this question, they have already stated that it's OK. But I guess not, since nobody has pointed it out.

If they said NO why would that change anything anyway? You seem to be assuming they would say no as it stands, so what's to lose?

Christian Petersen made quite a long post here about why their core sets contain the cards they do:

http://boardgamegeek.com/article/6795645#6795645

Anyway, long story short I will interpret your defensive sarcasm to mean that you're well aware you are probably breaching copyright, but that you feel ethically justified in doing so and would rather not give FFG chance to tell you otherwise.

Fair enough.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jon Ben
Canada
Vancouver
British Columbia
flag msg tools
badge
Of course I've been up all night! Not because of caffeine, it was insomnia. I couldn't stop thinking about coffee.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Considering that the worst case scenario is that FFG could issue a cease and desist I wouldn't worry. In Canada a recent amendment to copyright law (2012) makes this type of thing perfectly legal. Although in this particular case I would need to know a little more about the origin of the images linked to. I'm assuming those are legal images. Either way, making copies of my own cards for my own use is perfectly legal. I don't know where either of you live, but I'm assuming this back and forth is in a US context.

EDIT: Well, I suppose the worse case is worse than that... but honestly a C&D is about as much as anyone would expect, and more than anyone would reasonably expect.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Williams
Scotland
Elgin
Moray
flag msg tools
mbmb
I'm in the UK, but I'm pretty sure the law isn't much different in this regard.

And I don't believe it is legal, in either country, to make copies in order to use multiple copies at the same time.

If you purchase a textbook in order to teach your children about the subject, do you think it would be legal to copy the book so you can teach both your kids at once? What about 2 copies? Or 3? I'm pretty sure it isn't. However if you expect your copy to take a beating, it might be legal in most cases to copy the book (or parts of it) and use only the copy to teach with, to avoid damage to the original. This used to be common with tape-stored computer games, because it avoided the risk of your game tape getting mangled by your tape player. Again, this was often stated in the game insert.

There are exceptions for making backups or archives, to protect the consumer against data corruption etc. But I'm pretty sure that doesn't apply when you just want to be able to use multiple copies at once. This is why books like D&D books state explicitly that the character sheets can be freely reproduced for personal use.

I raised this partially because I'd actually like to know an official answer. Clearly it's something that goes on, and some people care more than others whether it's legal or not. But so far I haven't seen any convincing argument or citation to something that shows it's legal, just ethical rationalisations to justify it ethically.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jon Ben
Canada
Vancouver
British Columbia
flag msg tools
badge
Of course I've been up all night! Not because of caffeine, it was insomnia. I couldn't stop thinking about coffee.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-42/page-19.html#h-...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Williams
Scotland
Elgin
Moray
flag msg tools
mbmb
JonBen wrote:


Thanks for that. Though since I'm not in Canada, it doesn't help much. But I have been looking up the UK version, out of interest:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2014/9780111116036/regul...

This is still a draft, but it seems to say something similar.

If I read it correctly, it would be acceptable to make digital copies of your own cards, then print them. But not to download images from somewhere else and print those. Which would technically apply even if you own the cards but got the images elsewhere. It's hard to imagine anyone enforcing that though.

As it stands, I don't think this is in force yet. The UK copyright check sheet doesn't mention it:

http://www.copyrightservice.co.uk/copyright/p01_uk_copyright...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jon Ben
Canada
Vancouver
British Columbia
flag msg tools
badge
Of course I've been up all night! Not because of caffeine, it was insomnia. I couldn't stop thinking about coffee.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Yea that draft does seem remarkably similar to what was recently adopted here. We also adopted something similar to the Fair Use clause that the US has which is very welcome.

With some caveats I believe printing those images are okay under the Canadian law. I need to assume that they were derived from legal copies (I think this is the case, hasn't FFG sanctioned, or even provided, the use of these images on websites and software?). If that is true then I did legally obtain the image. Under this interpretation I don't need to own the cards at all in order to legally use copies of those images.

I'm not certain of that interpretation. However, it is clear that if I scan my cards and print copies I'm not infringing copyright.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Williams
Scotland
Elgin
Moray
flag msg tools
mbmb
JonBen wrote:
I'm not certain of that interpretation. However, it is clear that if I scan my cards and print copies I'm not infringing copyright.


Yes, contrary to my previous understanding, I would agree with that interpretation. It seems the law in the UK is likely to change if it hasn't already.

The best way to be sure is still to ask FFG, after all they know what type of copyright they have claimed and should know what uses are allowed with and without their permission, as well as which websites etc they have given permission to distribute cards electronically.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robbie M.
United States
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Chyron8472 wrote:
So before I ask them if it's okay to make decent looking proxies, maybe you could ask them to make a core supplement so that I don't feel obligated to make proxies at all. Heck, while they're at it, they could also make an errata card pack.

They get asked every time a new lcg comes out if they would consider making a "completion pack" and the answer is always no.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Troutman
msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
roborob wrote:
Chyron8472 wrote:
So before I ask them if it's okay to make decent looking proxies, maybe you could ask them to make a core supplement so that I don't feel obligated to make proxies at all. Heck, while they're at it, they could also make an errata card pack.

They get asked every time a new lcg comes out if they would consider making a "completion pack" and the answer is always no.
I know that the answer is no. The fact that they don't have (and won't make) a core supplement is my point.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Val P
msg tools
OK, I know that this discussion is old, but the sheer black and white aspect of it all makes me want to add another view to the argument.

After we have discussed legal infringments, customer desires and general human psychology, let me give you a brief example of a very similar case.

We all work (hoepfully) in one way or another in order to make a living and actually be able to afford what others have worked on and do for a living. In the working process it is natural for questions to arise for all sorts of things - and the answer is often crucial for the questioning person to be able to complete his job. And here comes the dilemma that is so similar to this very argument:

What happens when you are the guy with all the know-how? When you are asked how something is done that took you years of experience and study what should be your reaction? Ask a consultant and they will answer you that the answer won't be cheap for you (and they will tax you for that question as well). After all, you have spent long and hard learning all this stuff, so you deserve some payment. On the other hand, you are all working together and helping will take roughly a minute or two. Also some other guy like you may prove to be less of an *** and help the colleague, so why act like an *** in the first place? After all, they are not asking you to do all of their job instead of them (if they are, you should probably send them off with appropraite "blessings"), they have spent their share and are simply lacking one final piece of knowledge.

Sorry for the long post, but I think you see the double-edged sword and the reason FFG said nothing on all those sites that provide the image scans. You have already been paid for the game, have declared your position as the owner, but decide to spent that minute to help your close-minded friends so that in the future they will know who to ask, which generally improves the attitude towards you and gives you a good opportunity for growth, because you are "the reliable type".

So yes, it is basically something that is yours, but sharing for the common good is actually not a bad policy. Of course you can't go around boasting how helpful you are as it will blow your reputation.

TL;DR: FFG knows perfectly well about the Core Set proxy problem and have decided to provide players with the means to supplement themselves, without ruining their reputation or suffering any customer or production losses. To everybody out there: no matter what the law says, proxying 2-3 cards (or 11) when you own the rest won't cause anybody to be mad at you. Share that love and the publisher will love you instead.

PS: I own 2 LCGs so far, got a friend of mine into a third. If FFG were ***** I wouldn't ever recommend them.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.