[DGD] Commercial question

[Felix A. Croes]

Stephen Schmidt <schmidsj at union.edu> wrote:

> I think the argument that was made in the LP world was that
> having people help pay your server costs did not constitute
> "income" for you. Therefore, it was not in violation of the
> prohibition on earning income from using LPMud to take
> donations as long as they were used to cover server costs.

The LPmud license does not mention "income", but "monetary gain"
which according to some was income, and according to others, profit.

Income, I think, is a pretty well-defined term.


> I presume Dworkin would not accept that argument. But there
> are some sticky cases.
>
> Example: Two people start a mud. The server host charges
> $50 per month. Each one gets a bill from the host for $25
> and pays $25 of his own money. Clearly legal.
>
> Example: Two people start a mud. The server host charges
> $50 per month. One gets a bill from the host for $50. That
> one pays $50 of his own money. The other gives $25 of his
> own money to the first to cover half the bill. I think this
> is legal.
>
> Example: Ten people start a mud. The server host charges
> $50 per month. One gets the bill and pays it - the other
> nine each give $5 to the one who pays it. This seems
> legal, but it's getting tenuous.

It's legal -- the $5 from the other nine is income for the
one who pays the bill, but it's not income made through the mud.
Obviously, using DGD cannot prevent you from making money in a
general sense.


> Example: One person starts a mud and nine people play it.
> Each of the nine players gives the one who started it
> $5 to cover the server costs. This is not legal.

Correct.


> What distinguishes the last two examples? Or if the third
> example is also illegal, what distinguishes the second
> and the third?
>
> > I would take that line to mean that obvious work arounds to the
> > no-donations rule such as selling t-shirts or other merchandise with
> > your MUD's name on it to help cover server costs is also illegal
> > without a commercial license.
>
> I think those are more illegal than taking donations, since
> those are more obviously forms of income.

It seems to me that you are confusing "income" and "profit".
Donations and money made through merchandise are all income.

Regards,
Dworkin