You reap what you sow - GSL.

Maggan said:

I suspect that some companies, mostly smaller ones, will want to add content. I suspect that the larger ones won't even acknowledge the existence of this undertaking, and will become very agitated if it is brought up as a shining example.

Click to expand...

I think it sounds like a great idea and wish them the best of luck. Every rule that Paizo has ever published under the OGL is 100% open and is thus fair game for something like this.

I am not kidding when I say that Paizo is committed to Open Gaming.

--Erik Mona
Publisher
Paizo Publishing, LLC

Erik Mona said:

I think it sounds like a great idea and wish them the best of luck. Every rule that Paizo has ever published under the OGL is 100% open and is thus fair game for something like this.

I am not kidding when I say that Paizo is committed to Open Gaming.

--Erik Mona
Publisher
Paizo Publishing, LLC

Click to expand...

Holy cow. Cool statement Erik. But then again, Paizo has always been a class act.

/M

Erik Mona said:

I think it sounds like a great idea and wish them the best of luck.

Click to expand...

Thanks. The grand wiki has no intention of posting OGC content from publishers without their express permission (even though that is not required under the license). Matt offered content and so we are using the content offered, if Paizo or anyone else wants to offer content then we will definitely include it but it is not our intention to "take content" or "put pressure" on anyone to contribute or even acknowledge our existence.

Like all grand works, I'm sure this is going to take a monumentous effort to get anything tangible, but I'm excited by the support so far.

pemerton said:

The OGL is a contractual licence. It confers neither rights nor obligations on those who are not a party to it. Likewise for the GSL.

Click to expand...

Both the OGL and the GSL imply a strong statement of ownership. Any statement that says, Only if A, then B, implies that you cannot B without A, regardless of whether or not you wish to participate in A.

If you are not a party to the GSL, certainly WotC will not sue you on the basis of the GSL, but you can be certain that this doesn't mean that not agreeing to the GSL gives you the right to publish 4e materials -- on a fan website or anywhere else.

Under the OGL, a fan website could fairly easily comply with the terms of the license, and thus never have to (reasonably) worry about whether or not WotC would take action against it. OTOH, if WotC wants to "close off" older editions of the game (and both the GSL and the changes to 4e, some of which are simple changes to terminology from 3e -- apparently to imply that they are different from material under the OGL) suggests that it is more than reasonable to believe this is so, then the GSL (unlike the OGL) cannot be used to protect EN World.

This is a significant change, and pretending otherwise doesn't make it so. And simply because WotC isn't seeking to do so at this time doesn't mean it won't seek to do so a week from now, or a month from now, or a year. And because, at that time, the potential for claiming damages will be even higher than it is now, WotC will certainly have an upper hand in making sure that we never hear the full story of why EN World disappeared. It's called "nondisclosure".

I might also remind you that, earlier in the 4e launch cycle, I actually got a response from a WotC rep on this very issue, and the response was not that EN World was protected.

If I get some time next week, I'll try to find the post in my subscriptions, though if anyone wants to Search for it, that would make my life easier.


RC

Man-thing said:

Thanks. The grand wiki has no intention of posting OGC content from publishers without their express permission (even though that is not required under the license). Matt offered content and so we are using the content offered, if Paizo or anyone else wants to offer content then we will definitely include it but it is not our intention to "take content" or "put pressure" on anyone to contribute or even acknowledge our existence.

Like all grand works, I'm sure this is going to take a monumentous effort to get anything tangible, but I'm excited by the support so far.

Click to expand...

I made sure that there was some OGC in Dragon Roots #1.

I was pondering this thread I realized I probably owe the folks at Mongoose an apology. It would seem the motivations I ascribed to them were incorrect, and that I was inflicting guilt by association based on the behavior of some of their customers. And, since I know at least Matt was reading this thread, this seems the place to do it.

So, I apologize.

I'll freely admit to being fairly clueless on the OGL, but something struck me as I waded through this thread and a few of the OGL Wiki threads. It seems as though most (<-- notice the word most, not "all") of the reservations about an OGL Wiki come from the idea of consumers having free access to Open Content, thus hurting the sales of the creators of said content, not publishers having the right to modify, expand or simply re-use Open Content in their own works.

Again, please suffer my ignorance, but my impression of the OGL has always been that it was a tool for enriching game content by letting ideas from different designers and publishers intermix somewhat freely, to provide continuity and commonality to products (see: Tome of Horrors) and to generally enhance gaming interoperability. I have never seen it as a tool for granting consumers free access to gaming product.


As a consumer, while free content is interesting, it seems rather short-sighted.

SavageRobby said:

As a consumer, while free content is interesting, it seems rather short-sighted.

Click to expand...

Which is pretty much exactly why I've been a bit... irritable about all the wailing and moaning from consumers. The on-line SRD sites are nice if I'm posting to a pbem from work or we do a pick-up game while visiting friends. But the real benefit to consumers is in things like Iron Heroes and M&M or Rappan Athuk and Dungeon Crawl Classics, not in having a no-charge gaming fix.

I wonder if anyone could use the OGL to print something almost, but not quite, like 4e, without getting at all involved in GSL.

Particle_Man said:

I wonder if anyone could "pull an OSRIC" and use the OGL to print something almost, but not quite, like 4e, without getting at all involved in GSL.

Click to expand...

IANAL, but I doubt it. OSRIC works because 1e is about 20 years out of date and WotC has no intention of garnering money from it. 4e is new-hawtness and they want to get their investment back. Any attempt to OSRIC 4e would most likely face CnD letters if not outright lawsuits...