• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

Gleemax Terms of Use - Unacceptable

Raven Crowking

First Post
crazy_cat said:
Could I perhaps suggest a solution?

If you don't like or can't accept the Gleemax TOU then don't use the website. Problem solved.

How does that solve the problem of those who don't understand the TOU, who think that the language about WotC's intent protects their work, and who don't understand that they are granting WotC the ability to claim their work without compensation, to sell that right or sub-license it if they so desire, that they have no means of resistution, that they cannot revoke this right, and that this right lasts from the time you hit "Submit Reply" until the end of time (or this legal system, at least)?

What about the poor SOB who doesn't realize that, by running his Dungeon Crawl Classics module on Gleemax that he can be forced to pay any and all of WotC's legal expenses should they decide that they really like an idea in that module?

Or should we only be concerned about ourselves?

Because these are a heavily flawed TOU, and I think we have an obligation to point that out.


RC
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I'm A Banana

Potassium-Rich
Could I perhaps suggest a solution?

If you don't like or can't accept the Gleemax TOU then don't use the website. Problem solved.

The problem is that the TOU is unnecessarily draconian. How does not posting there fix the TOU?
 

JPL

Adventurer
Delta said:
Now, that's just downright silly.
(1) Were they bound up in endless litigation before this language was created? No.
(2) Does this language actually prevent a troublemaker from filing lawsuit? No.
(3) Does copyright law support a WOTC defense against such troublemakers anyway? Yes.
(4) Can't a troublemaker just post something on their own site and make the same claim anyway? Yes.

1. As someone else pointed out, they've had similar language on their message boards for some time.
2. Filing a lawsuit and avoiding early dismissal are two different things. Getting a suit thrown out on a motion for summary judgment is the next best thing to avoiding the suit altogether.
3. Maybe, maybe not. Why not add that extra layer of security?
4. But they'd have a much harder time proving anyone at WOTC even read the damn thing, wouldn't they?

I rank "WotC might steal my cool ideas from the message board" right up there with "WotC will use the decency clause to force me to shred all of my OGL stuff." It could happen. It hasn't happened. It seems unlikely to ever happen.
 

Raven Crowking

First Post
JPL said:
I rank "WotC might steal my cool ideas from the message board" right up there with "WotC will use the decency clause to force me to shred all of my OGL stuff." It could happen. It hasn't happened. It seems unlikely to ever happen.

Unless, of course, you run the Valar Project.......?

:uhoh:

RC


EDIT: BTW, what odds would you have given on WotC announcing 4e just prior to the announcement? Here on EN World, it seemed that anyone who thought the rumours about 4e were just being unrealistic. After all, WotC had strongly implied just the opposite....

What about the odds of Dungeon and Dragon being cancelled? I bet a lot of people would have ranked that right up there with "WotC might steal my cool ideas from the message board".

Remember when WotC denied the rumour about a tiered license? Or when they claimed that 4e would be published under the OGL? What odds would you have given then that 4e would be published instead under a tiered agreement that is anything but open? Up there with "WotC might steal my cool ideas from the message board"?

How about that the DI would suck when it first appeared? A lot of folks here scoffed at that idea, because it would be such an obviously bad move for WotC. Still up there with "WotC might steal my cool ideas from the message board"? No? How about the idea that you'd have to pay for randomized virtual minis?

And while we're looking at "WotC might steal my cool ideas from the message board", let's look at a much more likely scenario -- WotC might coincidentally publish something sorta like something Green Ronin published. Now, normally this would have nothing to do with you. But lets say that you discussed this Green Ronin product on Gleemax, and lets say that you quoted the relevant section of text. What now?

Well, whether you realized it or not, when you quoted that text you claimed that you had the right to do so. Moreover, you claimed that you had the right to transfer the right to use it (and to copyright, patent, and trademark it) to WotC. Moreover, you agreed that if there is any fallout from this, you would foot the legal bill. And pay any fines, royalties, etc., awarded to Green Ronin as a result of that action.

Now, see, I view that as a lot more likely of a scenario than "WotC might steal my cool ideas from the message board". I view that as a lot more likely than the cancellation of Dungeon and Dragon, than WotC barefacedly trying to call the tiered-not-OGL an OGL, and than the OGL being modified to prevent Valar from publishing The Book of Erotic Fantasy under the STL.

I do not view it as less likely than the announcement of 4e, or the DI sucking hard, because I expected both of those things.

Of course, in this case, the rights granted are irrevokable and perpetual, so you might go through the rest of your lifetime not knowing if that shoe is going to drop. Though I suspect that it will drop quietly on some poor schmoe before the announcement of 5e.

RC
 
Last edited:

RPGRealms

First Post
JPL said:
I rank "WotC might steal my cool ideas from the message board" right up there with "WotC will use the decency clause to force me to shred all of my OGL stuff." It could happen. It hasn't happened. It seems unlikely to ever happen.

WotC can't force anyone to shred OGL material because of the d20 license decency clause unless the material carries the d20 logo.
 

HeavenShallBurn

First Post
At its core for me this is an issue of respect and the lack thereof. Wizards is demanding that others have respect for their IP yet they do not extend that same respect to others.
 

Kesh

First Post
Kamikaze Midget said:
The problem is that the TOU is unnecessarily draconian. How does not posting there fix the TOU?
It's a form of "voting with your wallet." If no one uses the service, it's an expense with no profit and will be shut down. Or, they'll change the TOU so that people want to come and keep it alive. Either way, it's the most effective way of getting a corporation to change its mind.
 

JPL

Adventurer
Good point regarding the Valar Project, but I have never seen that as the egregious attack on free speech that some folks perceive. BoEF still saw print, just without the d20 logo or any other overt links between Hasbro / WotC and The Big Book of Elf Porn.

As an attorney, all I see is some pretty broad boilerplate meant to slap down AnonymousPoster74 from filing a frivolous lawsuit when WotC publishes something similar to a half-assed idea AP74 once posted.

I don't get your Green Ronin scenario. Are we imagining that WotC sues Green Ronin, or the other way around? Either way, WotC is not really going to drag AnonymousPoster74 into the suit counting on him to indemnify them, because (A) AnonymousPoster74 doesn't have any money anyway and (B) if used offensively by WotC in that manner, these message boards terms of use will most likely be construed by a court as a contract of adhesion and therefore unenforceable.

But bottom line, Raven, is that if something you post on a message board is really going to cause you a lifetime of fear that the other shoe is going to drop and that you will get dragged into a lawsuit, then you shouldn't post there.

BTW, I came up with idea for d20 Past in June 2003, but I was too lazy to sue WotC for stealing my idea:

http://www.enworld.org/archive/index.php/t-54638.html
 

JPL

Adventurer
HeavenShallBurn said:
At its core for me this is an issue of respect and the lack thereof. Wizards is demanding that others have respect for their IP yet they do not extend that same respect to others.

If your idea is so valuable, don't give away your idea on a damn message board. Develop it, publish it, and sell it. Message boards are great for brainstorming, but don't give away your "intellectual property" if you really plan to sell it.
 

resistor

First Post
JPL said:
If your idea is so valuable, don't give away your idea on a damn message board. Develop it, publish it, and sell it. Message boards are great for brainstorming, but don't give away your "intellectual property" if you really plan to sell it.

He didn't even mention the words "publish" or "sell" in his response. He said respect, which is completely independent of any plans to profit.

Just because I have no plans to sell the text of this post doesn't mean that I don't care about retaining my rights to it.
 

Remove ads

Top