General RPG DiscussionDiscussion of all RPGs and non-system-specific topics. DM/GM/player issues, settings, etc. Rules discussion belongs in one the forums below.
Alzrius, you misunderstand Clark's statements I think.
Clark is putting things in perspective.
No, he isn't.
I'm not commenting on his analysis of the GSL, his comparisons to the OGL, or anything legal. I'm objecting to his insulting OGL products he doesn't like and people who disagree with his stance, and stating his opinion about the quality of the GSL as though it were fact.
That's blatant threadcrapping, and it's not useful or helpful in any regard.
__________________ Need an informed review of a product? No problem! Check out my RPGnow Staff Reviews!
"Maybe"? I think when you've degenerated to name-calling and childish insults, to say nothing of broad characterizations regarding everyone who disagrees with you, then you've long since crossed that line.
Name calling? Childish insults? The only person I think would be offended by Orcus' statements is perhaps the publisher and/or writers of BoEF.
His statements that the license is not something to be worrying about is to put things in perspective, since a lot of people aren't publishers. I didn't see him insult you directly, unless you think some blunt honest opinions are wrong.
__________________
Forum FYI:
Kask is not the famous Tim Kask of the early days of TSR
I am that weird guy you see buried deep down in the credits section on many of EGGs later products.
They may not have any legal responsibility, but anything written for D&D is going to reflect on the brand of D&D - most people won't know or care that a BOEF (just as an example) was put out by a third party and not WoTC. It has the potential to reflect poorly on them, and as a result they'd like to reduce that potential.
But is there anything they can really do to prevent it even with the clause in the GSL? Nancy Grace claimed that a couple negligent parents were neglecting their children because they were playing D&D on the internet, when the clip showed clearly it was WoW. So even having the thing right there people are dumb and don't pay attention. Like you said people just claim something is what it is. So BoEF could say D&D, but wasn't made by them and any court of law would be like.... What does this have to do with WotC since they didn't write or publish this book?
Don't you have to prove the person you are blaming for any kind of damages is the responsible party? So anyone claiming damages, even with the GSL, would not be able to hold WotC to blame for something of "mature" content, if WotC did not write it.
I don't recall Gene Roddenbury held responsible for anything occuring from the porn flik Sex Trek with James T **** as the captain. It wasn't his fault, so cannot be held responsible for someone using or misusing his IP.
The potential will always be there for some people to complain about something. But in a court of law they will have to prove they are blaming the party responsible. In such a case of mistaken identify, I think then WotC could press charges for such then. But since the "Book of Goblin Porn" can exist outside of the GSL, then WotC has little to do but go through the courts, since the GSL never covered it in the first place.
Where is the GSL did cover it, they could terminate then and explain why in public record the maker of BoGP, and remove themselves from the responsible party for any damages caused by the BoGP....right?
As if anyone had failed to realize this, this topic is apt to have lots of passions behind it. So, people should be taking steps to be on their best behavior. Please, folks, let's not argue, fight, or get into ego contests.
If you think someone's thread crapping, we have a "report a post" feature. Getting in each other's faces about thread crapping has, to my knowledge, never rectified the situation to anyone's satisfaction.
I'm not commenting on his analysis of the GSL, his comparisons to the OGL, or anything legal. I'm objecting to his insulting OGL products he doesn't like and people who disagree with his stance, and stating his opinion about the quality of the GSL as though it were fact.
That's blatant threadcrapping, and it's not useful or helpful in any regard.
Or you might consider these possibilities:
Maybe he thinks the BoEF is garbage. Maybe he's been working his ass off for months helping WotC get the GSL into shape, and he's so frustrated from seeing the same complaints coming from a wide array of people who aren't qualified to know what they're talking about that he's gotten impatient even with those objections and objectors that do have potential validity.
(Though keep in mind that even Clark said he understands why some people might not want to hop on board.)
And maybe, as a lawyer, he really does believe he has a better understanding of the GSL's strengths and weaknesses than most people on a message board.
Could he have been more diplomatic? Sure, and it's unfortunate that he wasn't. But I think a certain level of frustration and tension are to be expected, and even excused, before we go accusing someone that we know to be a valuable member of the community (both ENWorld and D20 in general) of "threadcrapping."
Edit: Umbran beat me to it.
__________________ Ari Marmell
aka
Mouseferatu
--Rodent of the Dark
Booze and Jalapenos, OH MY!! Whee!!! Damn the new GSL!! That means in addition to the thieves at WOTC, the likes of Clark and other 3PP are going to be thieving from me too. My purse will be empty, my wife will be mad, my players happy, and me out of booze!! Curse all the publishers!! Curse 4e!!
__________________ "Let your light so shine before men, that they may see
your good works and give glory to your Father
who is in heaven." - Matthew 5:16 - One of Gary Gygax's favorite bible verses.
I'm not commenting on his analysis of the GSL, his comparisons to the OGL, or anything legal. I'm objecting to his insulting OGL products he doesn't like and people who disagree with his stance, and stating his opinion about the quality of the GSL as though it were fact.
That's blatant threadcrapping, and it's not useful or helpful in any regard.
Just so we're clear. The BoEF IS garbage. G-A-R-B-A-G-E.
And the whole maturity clause in the d20 STL and the GSL is a direct result of Anthony Valterra's epic fail in the good business sense department.
My acronym allotment for the day just ran out. What does BoEF stand for?
"Boobs of Elven Friends"
"Book of Elven f&*^"
"Biscuit's of Elven Flatulence"
__________________ "Let your light so shine before men, that they may see
your good works and give glory to your Father
who is in heaven." - Matthew 5:16 - One of Gary Gygax's favorite bible verses.
I obviously can't speak for the man, but I'ma give my opinion.
What I took away from what he said about the GSL wasn't that you should like it, or use it. What it seemed to me he was saying was it was no longer a flawed contract from the standpoint of a legal professional. He seemed to be saying it was now pretty much along the same lines as most other IP contracts. (And even more open because it's free.)
Whether or not you choose to operate with a license of that type is your own business.
I could be way off, but that's what I took from it.
Frankly, the BOEF was garbage and is EXACTLY the kind of product that content owners make license restrictions for--they dont want their brand affiliated with total crap. So the fact that there is a license that interfers with BOEF means the license is working correctly.
As for the d20 STL ending, all content/branding licenses have the chance to end. You always have to deal with that. In this case, they let you scrub off the logo and keep selling the stuff. That is MORE than reasonable. And the current license has a 6 month sell-off period. Again, more than reasonable.
Anyone who wants to hate on Wizards for the terms of the license simply doesnt use licenses. This stuff isnt particularly objectionable and any objection to it for those reasons is unreasonable.
Clark, I think you're overstepping here. There are plenty of licenses which don't have these restrictions, and it's not unreasonable to make a business decision that you don't want to incur the risk of either one of these.
And one man's "garbage" is another man's treasure. Not everyone's a prude and recoils at the concept of adult content in D&D. When I was active with the RPGA I remember a scenario getting revamped due to its "objectionable content" of some kid being the victim of a cult. When you sign on to a morals clause, you can never be sure what the person administering that is going to target - and according to this license, if Wizards terminates YOU, there is NO six month sell off.
You're certainly entitled to sign on, but I have to say your rant here is totally misplaced.
Not everyone's a prude and recoils at the concept of adult content in D&D.
Have you read Necromancer material?
Maybe Clark's problem is just that he doesn't like the quality of BoEF, rather than the topic?
(Note: I've never read BoEF all the way through, just skimmed it. I'm not saying it is or isn't good. I'm saying that just because he thinks Book X is garbage, it doesn't necessarily follow that he objects to the topic of Book X.)
__________________ Ari Marmell
aka
Mouseferatu
--Rodent of the Dark
When I was active with the RPGA I remember a scenario getting revamped due to its "objectionable content" of some kid being the victim of a cult.
Are you posting about River of Blood by Erik Mona? I remember running that. Great fun but the subject needed to be treated in a certain delicate fashion if younger players were involved.
Maybe Clark's problem is just that he doesn't like the quality of BoEF, rather than the topic?
(Note: I've never read BoEF all the way through, just skimmed it. I'm not saying it is or isn't good. I'm saying that just because he thinks Book X is garbage, it doesn't necessarily follow that he objects to the topic of Book X.)
But that would be disingenuous and irrelevant, as the GSL clause is a morals clause and not a "quality" clause.
Are you posting about River of Blood by Erik Mona? I remember running that. Great fun but the subject needed to be treated in a certain delicate fashion if younger players were involved.
Yep. I was one of the original LG Triads; ran that one and untold others... Not really sure how delicate you need to be. If they're old enough to play, they are killing and being killed - "oh no some kids got killed" is probably nothing not adequately depicted in art on their school notebooks.
[Edit: I bet this experience influenced how much trust Paizo's willing to put into the GSL morals clause today, sine Erik's one of the big boys over there. You reap what you sow...]
Yep. I was one of the original LG Triads; ran that one and untold others... Not really sure how delicate you need to be. If they're old enough to play, they are killing and being killed - "oh no some kids got killed" is probably nothing not adequately depicted in art on their school notebooks.
Well, let's not forget that April of the year before saw Columbine school as the sight of a tragedy that may have had most people particularly on edge regarding the killing of children.
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
