How about a deadline to WotC?

[joethelawyer]

This is a news and discussion site, very comfortably within fair use. We can talk about D&D all we like. Hell, it would suck for WotC if nobody was allowed to talk about their game!

I have a good relationship with Scott, et al. Any issues can be resolved amicably and quickly. I don't anticipate any problems, and I'm fairly sure they don't either.

Talking about it is not what i was getting at. I know we've come a long way from the bad old days, when T$R forced sites to be closed down all over the Internet if they had some high school kid's character, or home made monster or module on it.

As a lawyer, and a guy who saw people burned before on this issue, I look at the worst case scenario. As it stands now, it could happen all over again with 4e material, the new GSL, and lack of a license granting certain rights for the hosting of game materials for gamers' own personal use.

Even though I don't play or like 4e, I don't want to see that happen to other gamers. Then again, maybe I should hope that it does happen. The natural outcome would be for more people to go to Pathfinder or other non-4e materials. I don't think they'd be that stupid though...

 

[justanobody]

Sure you could. If I am not mistaken, you can use OSRIC to publish an AD&D compatible module or product, can't you? And I know nothing of OSRIC (or OSRIC 2.0).

If it was done when ORSIC existed.

I do not beleive any data could exist - you would need access to TSR's (then) sales records and a comprehensive statistical analysis which proved a correlation between your effort and their sales; and that said correlation was statistically significant (i.e. proving that two of your mates bought something becaus eof it is irrelevant). It would be a very complex and detailed proof.

Furthermore, even in you did have such details, you would need vastly wider statistics to provide evidence that it was anything more than a statistical aberration in that one case.

On the plus side, I do believe that you believe that.

I hereby give you permission to post, here on EN World, any such proof without moderator recrimination. Feel free to provide this data.

As I said it was hypothetical. The point still remains that the data would undergo so much scrutiny that it is likely to be thrown out.

I did write a plot hook and sell it in the past for a quarter a copy for the copy machine and it sold 4 extra PHBs at a LGS, but that is not the kind of thing I am talking about. One page printouts that sale a book are flukes, and that is likely any other data I had such that would be from LGS would be seen as or so infinitesimal as to be negligent.

But to actually have the adventure I have been working on for some time that people have tried to pay me for has been on hold indefinately because I have no legal right to even use the names of some of the things in it, and must remain my own homebrew until that time that I CAN use those names held by TSR....erm WotC now. So even the adventure is incomplete to prevent me from doing anything with it.

Why? Because I cannot afford some lawyer should someone decide a single word I used was out of place because my elves do no function exactly like those presented in a core book, but that is the only change or addition to races.

So how would the data be presented, or should I try to finish the adventure under OSRIC as catclaw suggests and then see IF WotC wants to grant some special license to adapt to 4th using my elves.

$1,000,000 bets Scott would refuse me a special license for a single adventure as I am just one random person, and IF Wotc wanted it under 4th, they would buy it as freelance, and then own it.

Again wish I knew where that podcast of the 3PP and WotC meeting went on my HDD to review it in regards to the new license that came to be known as the GSL.

Honestly, no offense, but this alone isn't enough to convince WOTC to alter their GSL to meet the needs you are expressing. If Clark at Necromancer Games can't get the changes done in time, I am not sure if justanobody can do it, unless you are a well credentialed, highly influential member of the RPG publishing community and you are just being modest.

That is pretty much my point in a nutshell, and I am as my username suggests...just a nobody.

My gripe with the GSL is just that. My gripe. If I were to publish I would want that option to change elves the way I want, and otherwise would prefer to have 3PP be able to do the same if they have some world or setting idea that warrants a change to what an elf is.

 

[Morrus]

Talking about it is not what i was getting at. I know we've come a long way from the bad old days, when T forced sites to be closed down all over the Internet if they had some high school kid's character, or home made monster or module on it.

As a lawyer, and a guy who saw people burned before on this issue, I look at the worst case scenario. As it stands now, it could happen all over again with 4e material, the new GSL, and lack of a license granting certain rights for the hosting of game materials for gamers' own personal use.

Even though I don't play or like 4e, I don't want to see that happen to other gamers. Then again, maybe I should hope that it does happen. The natural outcome would be for more people to go to Pathfinder or other non-4e materials. I don't think they'd be that stupid though...

Like I said, I have a good relationship with WotC and work with them in good faith. If an issue arose, it would be resolved amicably.

Honestly, don't worry. It's all good. WotC is very friendly.

 

[Shroomy]

IIRC, that book was the impetus for putting the objectionable material clause in the STL? Am I right?

I believe you are correct; it was originally going to be released under the d20 STL, but WoTC changed it, forcing them to go the OGL route.

 

[joethelawyer]

My gripe with the GSL is just that. My gripe. If I were to publish I would want that option to change elves the way I want, and otherwise would prefer to have 3PP be able to do the same if they have some world or setting idea that warrants a change to what an elf is.

so all this anger comes from the fact that you don't want to publish your module under the 4e GSL?

Put it out under the OGL or for Pathfinder, or some other system. Or make it generic enough that it fits in under any gaming system. If its a good enough module, people will convert it.

 

[Fifth Element]

What could a non-porn* product I make do to harm WotC or 4th anymore than the word of mouth and 4th edition itself has done to harm it?

Yeah. Don't even know where to start with that one.

 

[joethelawyer]

Quote:
Originally Posted by justanobody
What could a non-porn* product I make do to harm WotC or 4th anymore than the word of mouth and 4th edition itself has done to harm it?

Yeah. Don't even know where to start with that one.

I was about to take another hit of cough medicine to help me figure it out...

 

[Morrus]

As I said it was hypothetical.

Yes, I figured that. So that's that whole line of conversation over; let's drop that, as we should have done several posts ago.

But to actually have the adventure I have been working on for some time that people have tried to pay me for has been on hold indefinately because I have no legal right to even use the names of some of the things in it, and must remain my own homebrew until that time that I CAN use those names held by TSR....erm WotC now. So even the adventure is incomplete to prevent me from doing anything with it.

That adventure that only has value because WotC spent millions of dollars developing a product, a system, and a brand?

WotC is not a charity. Why should you be able to profit from their work? From their HUGE investment?

I wouldn't like it if you opened "enworld.net", and copied my efforts and used my brand name to do so.

Do you believe you should be able to sell a software package billed as "Windows 2009"? Build a car and produce it as a "BMW M8"?

I really don't get your point here. If you want to use WotC brand name, accept the conditions under which they generously allow you to (believe me, Microsoft wouldn't allow you to do that; neither would Sony allow you to release a Tomb Raider game; MGM would be very annoyed if you tried to produce a new Bond movie; the BBC would not allow you to publish a Doctor Who novel).

If you don't agree to those conditions, don't use the brand name. It's that simple. Why do you feel you have any right to the D&D brand name? How much money have you invested in it? If you want rights to it, start buying shares in Hasbro - buy enough, and it's yours.

Do you honestly not understand the concept and value of a brand? The vast resources that go into making it a worldwide name? The need to protect that incredibly valuable asset at all costs?

That brand name, "Dungeons & Dragons", is the most valuable thing that WotC owns. What's the most valuable thing you own? Your house? Your car? Is it OK if Scott Rouse comes and borrows it for a week? After all, he's spent ages working out how he want to redecorate your bedroom. How dare you not let him do it? He's got a great idea - pink walls, disco lights and a constant WWII air raid alarm going off at the head of the bed.

 

[justanobody]

so all this anger comes from the fact that you don't want to publish your module under the 4e GSL?

Put it out under the OGL or for Pathfinder, or some other system. Or make it generic enough that it fits in under any gaming system. If its a good enough module, people will convert it.

I am trying to forget 3rd edition ever existed thanks.

That adventure that only has value because WotC spent millions of dollars developing a product, a system, and a brand?

No it has value because the monsters and NPCs used in the story are crucial to them. Rather the story has a much greater value because of the monsters and NPCs created by TSR (Gary/Mentzer).

 

[joethelawyer]

Do you honestly not understand the concept and value of a brand? The vast resources that go into making it a worldwide name? The need to protect that incredibly valuable asset at all costs?

That brand name, "Dungeons & Dragons", is the most valuable thing that WotC owns.

He ought to go read a book by Nomi Klein called "No Logo." The power of branding would hit home like a brick to the head.