I agree with the NO, but with a caveat.
I think Wizards is aware of the copyright status and prior court cases, and I suspect they are aware that it can be done.
I truly think WoTC is more worried about the OGL than YCCGS (you can't copyright game stats). Two things about the OGL appear to bother Wizards Legal (and perhaps marketing). First, the "viral nature" allows other publishers to reproduce anything marked as open, which lead to the free SRD references. I strongly suspect they don't want their content being commoditized, which is why after Unearthed Arcana they've pretty much kept everything closed. I also suspect the fact that the license has a "safe harbour" clause and no revocation clauses is troubling to them.
I truly don't think Wizards cares about suppressing successful publishers, but they do want to reserve the right to shut a publisher down who might be hurting the brand, likely after the Book of Erotic Fantasy fiasco. They don't want to do it to 98% of the publishers, just the 2% that get out of line.
I suspect that if you are using the YCCGS argument, WoTC will only try to shut you down if you are harming the brand (graphic sex, for instance), violating the trademark, or using their core "private IP" (those beasts, for instance, not in any SRD, or writing an adventure in one of their campagin settings).
Based on the no OGL clause in the GSL, however, I suspect anybody who attempts to mix 4e with OGL--especially any attempt to create a "generic version" of D&D 4e and release it under the OGL will feel their lawyers' wrath. It might cost them money, but seeing all the "no OGL" statements in the GSL make me think it's a battle worth fighting to them.
That's why you'll probably see most publishers who want to use 4e rules, use the YCCGS method and give up the OGL. (3e publishers like Paizo have more protection under the OGL and it would be foolish of them not to take it). I don't know what Goodman games is up to, but assuming they aren't using the GSL, I suspect they are destroying old inventory to no longer use the OGL for extra legal protection. Thinking from a business perspective, it would be very foolish to try to use the OGL with 4e knowing Wizards' reaction to it.
The most troubling thing to me is that Wizards doesn't seem to care about promoting the use of the GSL. I would think they could have offered more incentives to publishers. In addition to some clauses being a little to restrictive in the license, maybe they should have done some kind of co-op advertising agreement or something similar to add value to the brand name being used. WoTC could promote their GSL partners as "truly official and authorized" and considering that the brand name is still powerful, it might have a good effect.
I think Wizards is aware of the copyright status and prior court cases, and I suspect they are aware that it can be done.
I truly think WoTC is more worried about the OGL than YCCGS (you can't copyright game stats). Two things about the OGL appear to bother Wizards Legal (and perhaps marketing). First, the "viral nature" allows other publishers to reproduce anything marked as open, which lead to the free SRD references. I strongly suspect they don't want their content being commoditized, which is why after Unearthed Arcana they've pretty much kept everything closed. I also suspect the fact that the license has a "safe harbour" clause and no revocation clauses is troubling to them.
I truly don't think Wizards cares about suppressing successful publishers, but they do want to reserve the right to shut a publisher down who might be hurting the brand, likely after the Book of Erotic Fantasy fiasco. They don't want to do it to 98% of the publishers, just the 2% that get out of line.
I suspect that if you are using the YCCGS argument, WoTC will only try to shut you down if you are harming the brand (graphic sex, for instance), violating the trademark, or using their core "private IP" (those beasts, for instance, not in any SRD, or writing an adventure in one of their campagin settings).
Based on the no OGL clause in the GSL, however, I suspect anybody who attempts to mix 4e with OGL--especially any attempt to create a "generic version" of D&D 4e and release it under the OGL will feel their lawyers' wrath. It might cost them money, but seeing all the "no OGL" statements in the GSL make me think it's a battle worth fighting to them.
That's why you'll probably see most publishers who want to use 4e rules, use the YCCGS method and give up the OGL. (3e publishers like Paizo have more protection under the OGL and it would be foolish of them not to take it). I don't know what Goodman games is up to, but assuming they aren't using the GSL, I suspect they are destroying old inventory to no longer use the OGL for extra legal protection. Thinking from a business perspective, it would be very foolish to try to use the OGL with 4e knowing Wizards' reaction to it.
The most troubling thing to me is that Wizards doesn't seem to care about promoting the use of the GSL. I would think they could have offered more incentives to publishers. In addition to some clauses being a little to restrictive in the license, maybe they should have done some kind of co-op advertising agreement or something similar to add value to the brand name being used. WoTC could promote their GSL partners as "truly official and authorized" and considering that the brand name is still powerful, it might have a good effect.
