New GSL Announcement

[Psion]

Linnae said this:


(emphasis mine)

You understand, that statement would be perfectly true if Clark's take is correct as well, right?

Although I'm certain there is a lot we don't know, I don't think Linnae would have said "We totally recognize that this mutual exclusivity will keep some publishers from joining us in 4E. That's a business decision they need to make, and we respect that." if it was merely on a product by product basis. Your reading wouldn't keep anyone from supporting 4e albeit with entirely different products. Scott's post after Clark's take didn't do anything to refute the notion.

I'd love to be wrong, though.

 

[Tim Gray]

All of which is why I asked if someone from WotC was able to confirm the whole company thing.


(And posters who replied "look at the timestamps" etc might wish to note that I didn't say "right now".)

 

[SavageRobby]

I don't think anyone who actually thinks it through should be mad at WotC. This is, frankly, a smart move. They're already letting other companies use their IP and property; why should they do that and still have those companies driving sales/customers to a system that no longer supports WotC itself?

I'm not at all surprised by this restriction.

Funny, I think anyone who actually critically thinks it through should be upset with WotC. It might be smart, but I see it as unethical and heavy handed. (It'd be like Microsoft telling people they could either publish software for Vista or for XP, but not both.)

That said, I'm not at all surprised by the restriction either. Nor by the shillsfolks defending it.

 

[Firevalkyrie]

I dunno, I think this is, if not transparent, clearly not a "product-by-product" stance either:

linky

That statement does not logically exclude producing both 3.x and 4E product.

It says, "If you can sustain yourself totally on 3.x product, great, more power to you. Otherwise the 4E license is over here."

 

[Pinotage]

I've posted this question in the news item regarding the GSL, but I think it might actually be answered here.

Can you update existing OGL to the GSL? It seems that if you can't have a OGL and GSL product under the same license, then you can't do this without withdrawing the OGL product. But, since it's an OGL product, other product may have used the OGC. So you can't fully withdraw the OGL product, and hence you'll awlays violate the 'can't have 3e and 4e' part of the GSL. By the looks of it, fantastic OGL can't be re-released as GSL. I really hope I'm wrong.

Pinotage

 

[Charwoman Gene]

(It'd be like Microsoft telling people they could either publish software for Vista or for XP, but not both.)

It'd be like MS requiring you to not be part of their "MS Vista Approved" program if you kept pushing your old XP software. Perfectly valid. I could publish a supplement for 4e without using the GSL. It'd just be tricky. You want to use the free easy way out they give you, gotta play by the rules.

 

[defendi]

They say that you can update to the GSL in the initial announcement. I suspect that other people using your OGC doesn't effect it. I can give someone permission to quote a novel or short story I've written, then pull that product out of print and the third party quoting me doesn't effect matters one way or another.

 

[Charwoman Gene]

Can you update existing OGL to the GSL?

The license isn't released so this is all speculative.

I'd say ceasing distribution and not opening the IP up more than it already has been would be sufficient.

 

[Umbran]

That said, I'm not at all surprised by the restriction either. Nor by the shillsfolks defending it.

SavageRobby, if you want to engage in namecalling childishness, do it on some other messageboard. Don't post in this thread again.

Folks, I understand that policy changes may leave many people upset. But let me be clear - it is not acceptable for you to take your frustration out on people here. No matter what WotC does, we expect you to be civil and respectful to other posters on EN World.

If you don't feel you can live up to that expectation, you should hold off posting until you can. Go take a walk in the spring sunshine, or something, and come back when your head is cool.

 

[Flynn]

I would like to ask a point of clarification from WOTC:

In these discussions, is the limitation regarding the cessation of OGL publications apply to all OGL products (including those that are not based on the WOTC SRD such as Runequest or Traveller), or does this only apply to OGL products that are based on the WOTC SRD or MSRD?

While I hope it is restricted to only D20 SRD-derived products, as identified within a properly completed Section 15, I fear that this limitation may apply to non-SRD-derived gaming systems as well.

It is important to me as a small-time publisher to clarify that limitation, as I was intent on supporting Traveller OGL as well as the GSL, and now I feel that I may not be able to do so, simply because Traveller, with its non-D20 gaming system, will be released under the same license as the D20 SRD.

Scott and Lidda, I look forward to your response with anticipation.

With Regards,
Jason "Flynn" Kemp