Moving forward with guides

["Eric Benson" <ebenson@xxxxxxxx>]

> My vehicle list did exist and had been submitted to CEE, but they were not
interested because they had there own project in
> the works; ie your book.

Rather than get into a shooting war over this, is there a way to move
forward with the work that has been done and produce a significantly
improved version that meets people's needs?  We can all agree that
individually, a fair amount of work has been done, but yet individually, no
one piece of work really fits everyone's needs.

CEE (I assume) holds the copyright for the original version prepared by
Arclight.  Unless Arclight signed away all of his rights to any future use,
he (or anyone he authorizes) has the right to publish a version that is
'significantly different' from his original version.

We get into the same thing with a lot of academic journals.  If you write
for the original journal, subsequent versions have to present significant
new information.  Repackaging isn't enough.

Adding new rules would a significant addition, significantly altering the
number of vehicles would also help.  Changing to photographs by the members
would eliminate another potential copyright infringement.  Not selling it
for a profit would minimize potential infringement suits.

I also see this with the both the CEE weapons book and the material that Rob
and others have prepared.  Individually, they are good, but not complete.
The weapons statistics, for example, only tell a portion of the story.
Unfortunately, many people interested in the game will never get a chance to
see the 'real thing'.  Stats alone leave you with operatives running around
with Desert Eagle .50's and General Electric M134's.  It's the commentary on
the weapons that differentiates between the good, the bad and the ugly.

The question is - are people willing to work together to produce a better
product or are we going to get in a pissing war over it?

- Eric