You reap what you sow - GSL.

[Raven Crowking]

The OGL didn't actually apply to fansites, though they certainly could utilize it. With 3.xe, WotC had a seperate agreement for publishers than it did with fan sites and appears to be planning the same with 4e.

(Shrug)

My reading of the OGL is "You may use this material if you abide by these terms; if you use this material without abiding by these terms, you may be liable." Not sure how that fails to apply to fansites.

Let WotC say the same, and I'll be happy to make a 4e fan site with rules that work for less wahoo, more traditional D&D games. Happy to.

(Happy to have contribution from lots of folks here as well......!)


RC

 

[eyebeams]

Do some Google searches for "OGC Wiki" and you'll gain some insight on which publishers were firmly for using the OGL to their own advantage but firmly against letting anybody re-use their content (even material that had been designated as OGC).

Basically, Mike Mearls proposed an OGC wiki as a fan/publisher resource, and a bunch of movers and shakers in the hobby industry blew a gasket, going so far as to state that they did not want any content they had previously declared as OGC reused for such a project.

This is the kind of disingenuous OGC declaration and OGL manipulation that I think Merric alludes to. There was some hardcore wankery involved.

Mike's a great guy, but given Iron Heroes' OGC declaration, he has no moral high ground at all.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Do me a favor and let Prince know this please?

He is the Prince....OF FOOLS!

HAHAHAHAHAHA! ZING!

 

[Fifth Element]

Mike's a great guy, but given Iron Heroes' OGC declaration, he has no moral high ground at all.

Mr. Mearls wrote Iron Heroes. Monte Cook's Malhavoc Press published it. I think Mr. Cook is more likely to blame for any perceived problems with the OGC declaration. I doubt any publisher would allow the author of a work the final say in determining what is OGC and what is not.

 

[useridunavailable]

Never mind - misread something.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Mr. Mearls wrote Iron Heroes. Monte Cook's Malhavoc Press published it. I think Mr. Cook is more likely to blame for any perceived problems with the OGC declaration. I doubt any publisher would allow the author of a work the final say in determining what is OGC and what is not.

Smells like fanboi nonsense to me, Fifth. I seriously doubt that if Mike had said "But I want it to be all OGC!" than Monte would have stopped him. He's not exactly known for his obsessively grasping ways, now, is he?

 

[jdrakeh]

Mike's a great guy, but given Iron Heroes' OGC declaration, he has no moral high ground at all.

I never said that Mike had moral high ground, only that he proposed the OGC wiki and lots of publishers strenuously objected on the grounds that they didn't actually want people to use their OGC.

Since you mention it, though, did he (i.e., Mearls) have any control over content distribution in Iron Heroes? I know that he did the design and most of the writing, though it was actually published by Malhavoc Press.

I assume the publisher would be the party designating OGC and PI, as they're the entity that held the Copyright on the work in question (it appears to have since been transferred to Adam Windsor).

 

[The Little Raven]

Smells like fanboi nonsense to me, Fifth.

That's exactly what your post sounds like, except directed towards Monte instead of Mike.

I seriously doubt that if Mike had said "But I want it to be all OGC!" than Monte would have stopped him. He's not exactly known for his obsessively grasping ways, now, is he?

As Mearls is the guy that proposed the OGC Wiki, which wasn't a popular idea among a number of key publishers, I find it far more likely that Monte Cook (or people working for him) were the ones that wrote the OGC Declaration for Iron Heroes. Unless you actually have some proof that Mearls did, that is.

 

[eyebeams]

Mr. Mearls wrote Iron Heroes. Monte Cook's Malhavoc Press published it. I think Mr. Cook is more likely to blame for any perceived problems with the OGC declaration. I doubt any publisher would allow the author of a work the final say in determining what is OGC and what is not.

We're talking about a company that probably had less than 5 employees, not a vast corporation ruled by unchangeable draconian policy. I would call the idea that Mike had no way to influence this . . . unlikely.

Anyway, there's always been a divide between people who believe open source is a medium for exchange through informal, though still socially-mediated means and those who believe it means an active encouragement to use. This isn't just in gaming. I mean, you have people howling about the freedom to redistribute being a plank on which it's based, but if you follow open source software, people complain about distribution without community contribution all the time.

The OGL was, I think, largely predicated on Ryan Dancey's astute observation that many game companies are not driven by a rational economic motive -- but the mistake was assuming that given the opportunity to form better business models, nobody would *graduate* from that motive. But they did -- and that meant establishing independent, competitive branding and autonomy from the things the OGL was supposed to do for WotC. Companies like Green Ronin worked very hard to locate and dominate noncompetitive niches instead of settling for a commensal relationship.

 

[Fifth Element]

We're talking about a company that probably had less than 5 employees, not a vast corporation ruled by unchangeable draconian policy. I would call the idea that Mike had no way to influence this . . . unlikely.

Yes, if you read my post I said that Mr. Cook is more likely to be to blame, and that it is unlikely he would have given final say to Mr. Mearls. Not sure why these perfectly reasonable comments are drawing ire.

I in no way said that Mr. Mearls had no influence at all. I don't see how you could read my comments that way. I was responding to someone who implied that Mr. Mearls had the final determination as to the OGC declaration of Iron Heroes. We have no way of knowing that, and it's a bold assertion given the circumstances.