GSL and the .pdf market

WotC seems pretty explicit that companies licensed to sell 4E-compatable goods will not be allowed to legally continue to sell 3.5/d20 products. While I'm sure companies will be allowed to sell off their current stock of printed products, I have to wonder what will become of the .pdf versions of print products (or .pdf-only products for that matter) such as the ones available at DriveThruRPG.

Will companies:
*Be allowed to keep selling them under a "grandfather clause" so long as they were produced before June 2008?
*Be forbidden from selling them any more?

And if forbidden:
*those .pdfs will never be available again?
*those .pdfs will become free downloads only?
*those .pdfs may be updated to 4E and then put back on the market?

Ideas?
Suspicions?
Inside info?

There should be an FAQ/Q&A thing coming out of WotC about these kinds of issues Real Soon Now(tm). Scott may or may not cross post it here; originally ENWorld had a chance to do an email interview with questions, then they decided to do it themselves on the WotC forums... Admins here posted our questions in that thread there. In theory, there will be a response, but most of those involved have been busy at GAMA through today(24th). It's over now, so maybe we'll get an answer Soon.

Minor point. I don't think they can legally prohibit anyone publishing 4.0 product from also publishing 3.x product, rather if you publish 3.x your license to publish 4.0 material will be revoked.

I have read on other threads that a workaround to this is for publishers to create a second company that will publish 4.0 material (or continue to publish 3.x material, depending on how you want your original name to be associated) and as long as one company doesn't directly control the other, there's not much that Wizards can do about it.

Of course it ultimately all depends on the wording of the GSL. It's possible that Wizards may put some sort of clause in it that explicitly forbids any 4.0 publisher from having any connection whatsoever with any other company that continues to produce 3.x product. Or they may back off the prohibition entirely.

Anyway, I've read conflicting stories about that clause. Some of it seem to be that you're not prohibited from publishing in both editions, just that you can't publish a specific book in both editions, like Paizo is planning to keep publishing in 3.5 using their new Pathfinder RPG system and they have stated they might publish in 4.0 as well, they would just have to create new 4.0 material, not publish any Pathfinder that they put out in 3.x.

I still wonder what's to become of all the hundreds (thousands) of 3.5 compatible .pdfs for sale right now. They're not printed product, so the rules will have to be different for them.

Grimstaff said:

I still wonder what's to become of all the hundreds (thousands) of 3.5 compatible .pdfs for sale right now. They're not printed product, so the rules will have to be different for them.

Click to expand...

Burn them on a virtual pyre! We can have a PDF burning and roast virtual hotdogs over their flame.

Grimstaff said:

WotC seems pretty explicit that companies licensed to sell 4E-compatable goods will not be allowed to legally continue to sell 3.5/d20 products.

Click to expand...

Really, because that doesn't seem to be what they said, is it?

As Linae foster said:

Publishers can put out a product under the OGL - OR - they can put out a product under a 4E GSL.

3.x or 4E

Not both.

One or t'other.

By "mutual exclusivity" I mean, different versions of the same product cannot occur at the same time.

Click to expand...

She then clarified that this is a product-by-product limitation.

So it appears that your entire post is based on a misreading of the proposed license.

While I'm sure companies will be allowed to sell off their current stock of printed products, I have to wonder what will become of the .pdf versions of print products (or .pdf-only products for that matter) such as the ones available at DriveThruRPG.

Click to expand...

You shouldn't believe that companies will be allowed to sell off their current stock. If companies want to delay the sale of their 4E product so they can sell off their 3E product, they are fine to sell their current stock. For the purposes of the monopoly on the distribution of information granted by copyright, there is no difference between the distribution of information through printed books and the distribution of information through the internet. If a company allows DriveThruRPG to distribute a 3E version of a product while the company attempts the distribution of a 4E version of the product, they will be in violation.

Grimstaff said:

I still wonder what's to become of all the hundreds (thousands) of 3.5 compatible .pdfs for sale right now. They're not printed product, so the rules will have to be different for them.

Click to expand...

As far as I know: nothing! If they have the D20 logo on them that will have to be changed, after a certain date.

vagabundo said:

As far as I know: nothing! If they have the D20 logo on them that will have to be changed, after a certain date.

Click to expand...

Though in the end, it might be enough to just remove the logo and exchange any d20 logo text with the OGL?

Off course that depends on how intertwined their rules where with 3E. I am really not familiar enough with the differences between the OGL and the D20 Logo, except that the second is supposed to imply a closer relationship to D&D itself.

Kwalish Kid said:

Really, because that doesn't seem to be what they said, is it?

As Linae foster said:


She then clarified that this is a product-by-product limitation.

So it appears that your entire post is based on a misreading of the proposed license.

Click to expand...

It seems your entire post is based on not reading further into the thread. A few posts below Linae's comments, Clark Peterson (Orcus of Necromancer Games) relates a conversation that he had with Wizards that indicated to him that the license exclusivity was company-specific, and not product-specific.

Neither Linae nor Scott Rouse were willing or able to dispel Clark's perception of that policy, despite the thread going on for another 1000 posts or so.

This is not a manufactured controversy. It's not official, but every indication is that, at least as of the time Clark related his conversation, company-wide exclusivity is the policy.

Obviously, there's some hope that will change.

Pdf

If I might post a quote from the main ENWorld page (that you can still see if you scroll down) "PDF sellers will be asked to update their products within that six month time and remove the logo." So you answer is, if you are selling PDFs and you want to move to 4.0, you either need to update or stop selling within 6 months of deciding to sell 4.0 stuff.

I'm surprised that everyone aren't posting more negative reactions. There will be no M&M, True20, C&C, Arcana Evolved, or equivalent written for 4.0 - "No Covered Product may contain rules or instructions of any kind that:

• Describe a process for Creating a Character
• Describe a process for Applying the Effects of Experience to a Character".

Variations of this quote also keep companies from developing any automated tools to assist with character generation, so you can wave goodbye to PCGen, Fantasy Grounds, or whatever you are using right now as a play aid.

Mark