Copyleft Tarot Decks?

Thread originally posted on the Aeclectic Tarot Forum on 26 Jul 2002, and now archived in the Forum Library.

Laurel	26 Jul 2002
Someone posted a link to the Coleman-Smith tarot in another thread and when I went to the author's website, http://lightage.com/colman-smith/ I noticed that its got a GPL (general public license) as opposed to a copyright. Does anyone know of other GPL'ed tarot decks? The gist of the GPL is that you can freely copy and redistribute this tarot as long as you give the author credit and don't modify it in any way. Laurel

Pollux	26 Jul 2002
I wonder if ever a copy was sold... Rider-Waite-Smith might be bad and not the top of fashion and design, but as granny used to say "there always is something WORSE than BAD"... I hope no one will be offended, but WHO would ever get a copy of it? Even with the GPL, I don't think I could be bothered to use this deck... so WEIRD! :(

jmd	26 Jul 2002
Laurel, thank you for the link. It's always good to have additional references for electronic copies of decks for study purposes. With regards to Pollux's comments, I must admit that my sense of humour is always touched by ambiguities and paradoxes - so I presume that Pollux must either have or have previously owned a Waite/Colman-Smith in order to make call it 'bad and not the top of fashion and design' from a knowledgeable position, and thereby partly answers his own question as to who 'would ever get a copy of it?' Of course, the fuller answer is most Tarot enthusiasts - including many who do not necessarily really like it for various reasons. Having called the Waite/Colamn-Smith deck 'bad', I also wonder which deck or decks Pollux was calling worse when quoting his grandmother thus 'there always is something WORSE than BAD'? :) Having given space to my (some would say poor sense of) humour, and to return to the original question, I was under the assumption that all decks whose fifty year copyrights had ended could be re-published with general public license appelation. As mentioned on the given site, it is not the deck which is copyrighted by USGames, but its title. It would be useful, then, to take up Laurel's question and list which decks have been so 'published' and by whom. I should also add that my legal knowledge has many gaps, especially as countries have different and inconsistent laws.

Liliana	27 Jul 2002
Well just imagine reading with it under a blacklight. It be a totally trippy experience dude ;) :THP

Laurel	27 Jul 2002
That's a really good point about old decks published 50+ years ago, something I hadn't thought of. I'm not up to date on copyright law either. Laurel

Sally Gardens	28 Jul 2002
Hmmmm... It does sorta look like it should have "Aquarius" playing in the background... :D I think I prefer the nuanced color pencil of the Universal Waite, but this *would* be fun to use in black lighting, preferably with 60's music in the background and a bit of, um, incense, yeah, incense, wafting through the air.... Far out.

the hermit	28 Jul 2002
I think Pollux was commenting on the "interesting" color scheme of the Colman-Smith tarot as opposed to the overall Rider-Waite-Smith tarot when he said "ouch" and "worse than bad". It is pretty strange. Didn't someone here call this deck something to the effect of "Timothy Lear meets tarot" or "tarot on acid"? Sorceress_Jade, was that you? :)

The Copyleft Tarot Decks? thread was originally posted on 26 Jul 2002 in the Tarot Decks board, and is now archived in the Forum Library. Read the active threads in Tarot Decks, or read more archived threads.