Revised GSL TODAY!

[Arksorn]

Here's another vote for that!

And another!

 

[MadBrewLabs]

That is terrible advice.

Everyone please disregard it.

The revised GSL is a huge improvement and includes many of the changes and suggestions that I specifically, and I am sure others as well, have been calling for for a long time.

.....

This is a big WIN for all involved.

Clark

Eh, I don't think this is a HUGE improvement, especially considering the timeframe involved to make these changes since they were announced on 08/11/2008. I am especially not thrilled about the survivable clauses... To be frank this license looks like it can really screw someone over if they agreed to it and then had a change of heart later.

I mean is Clark Peterson drinking the kool-aid or perhaps he is right, and the GSL is/was so rotten that any improvement can be seen as HUGE. But I can't say it is a bug win... seems like an epic loss to me.

 

[avin]

Here's another vote for that!

Count as preordered any 4E Monster Book that comes from Paizo.

 

[BryonD]

I mean is Clark Peterson drinking the kool-aid or perhaps he is right, and the GSL is/was so rotten that any improvement can be seen as HUGE. But I can't say it is a bug win... seems like an epic loss to me.

Kick people in the teeth hard enough the first time, they will thank you for just kicking their shins the second time around.

 

[DaveMage]

I think it's a good license for publishers that want to make 4E-compatible products.


However, I'll take the OGL and 3.x-compatible products, TYVM.

 

[CharlesRyan]

Kick people in the teeth hard enough the first time, they will thank you for just kicking their shins the second time around.

So WotC offers every single person on earth the right to profit by publishing materials based on their IP, but only on their terms, and that's comparable to kicking people in the teeth?

Time for a reality check.

 

[Piratecat]

Kick people in the teeth hard enough the first time, they will thank you for just kicking their shins the second time around.

Huh. I was thinking the reverse: let people become entitled enough, and they'll start to expect free licenses that no one is actually required to grant.

 

[jgbrowning]

I'd like to thank Scott and those at WotC for these changes. I appreciate a less restrictive license.

joe b.

 

[pawsplay]

I don't see why you couldn't create your own version of, say, a gnome, and be within your legal rights to do so.

Expeditious retreat press did so in the Advanced Players Guide.

Well, you can't, as soon as a gnome is listed in the SRD. Then you can't even state that gnomes are short.

 

[webrunner]

Right, but I'm not one of the tinfoil hat brigade who think WotC will use the "terminate at will" clause willy-nilly. They are sensible enough to understand the implications of exercising that clause without good reason.

At lower levels they'd have to rely on it due to lack of options, but at higher levels they can use their more powerful "terminate encounter" abilities more often.


On a more serious note.. I still don't understand why they limit what's in the SRD, instead of just saying "Anything in the books". It's not like they're actually sharing these things with the publishers, they're just letting them say that they exist and where. They can't modify them or put them in their own books, they can't USE things from the SRD, just REFER to them... so there's really no legal reason not to let people have everything. In fact, it gives people more reason to buy the books.. if you published an adventure that used Manual of the Planes content, then more people would have to get insider or manual of the planes in order to use it.