How about a deadline to WotC?

[catsclaw227]

Not allowing something that they have no obligation to allow, is not interference. Your statement implies that you, and 3pp publishers, have an entitlement to this. You (and they) do not. If they want to grant the entitlement to do this, they can (and have). They also have the right to dictate the conditions upon which this entitlement is granted. That is their right and THEY ARE ENTITLED TO IT.

This.

Why is it that some people believe that because WOTC decided to close up their product, and provide a different 3PP use license, that WOTC has violated their rights?

 

[Morrus]

This.

Why is it that some people believe that because WOTC decided to close up their product, and provide a different 3PP use license, that WOTC has violated their rights?

It's simply human nature. Those used to getting something for free develop a sense of entitlement to that thing, and erroneously equate the cessation of that free supply to actual loss; and further develop the belief that someone NOT giving them something for free is therefore in the wrong.

A behavioural trait often displayed by children; most people grow out of it by the time they reach adulthood, but some never shake it.

 

[catsclaw227]

It's simply human nature. Those used to getting something for free develop a sense of entitlement to that thing, and erroneously equate the cessation of that free supply to actual loss; and further develop the belief that someone NOT giving them something for free is therefore in the wrong.

A behavioural trait often displayed by children; most people grow out of it by the time they reach adulthood, but some never shake it.

Yea, I hear what you are saying...

Though, I would venture to guess that it is less human nature than it is the nature of this culture of entitlement that has been pervasive since the 80's (or so). I'll stop now, because this can get me worked up into a philosophical debate that teeters on borderline unacceptable for these forums.

You are spot-on with your last sentence, for sure.

 

[xechnao]

It's simply human nature. Those used to getting something for free develop a sense of entitlement to that thing, and erroneously equate the cessation of that free supply to actual loss; and further develop the belief that someone NOT giving them something for free is therefore in the wrong.

A behavioural trait often displayed by children; most people grow out of it by the time they reach adulthood, but some never shake it.

Why do you say "erroneously"? People do get conditioned. You can't call this an error. So the details of every type of information have their importance too. Why is there not such a problem (at least to the acknowledged measure) with free product promotions?

 

[Delta]

A behavioural trait often displayed by children; most people grow out of it by the time they reach adulthood, but some never shake it.

Perhaps you should address that to the person or company who wrote this:

Q: Is there an ethical reason to support Open Gaming?​

A: In this writer's opinion, yes there is. It has been an established feature of RPGs since their inception that they should be used to create new content. Prior to the advent of widespread Open Game licenses, there was no practical way for that kind of material to be legally and widely distributed.​

Open Gaming is recognition that your natural human right to free speech is protected and enhanced. The Open Game system is a way for the game publishing industry to finally deliver on the basic promises made by the very first RPGs; that individuals should be free to copy, modify and distribute their own creative works derived from the game systems they have acquired.​

 

[thecasualoblivion]

Perhaps you should address that to the person or company who wrote this:

Do you keep that quote on speed dial?

 

[catsclaw227]

Why is there not such a problem (at least to the acknowledged measure) with free product promotions?

Actually, this is an issue with free promotional stuff, across industries. There are loads of examples across the web.

But, even for WOTC this has been an issue. We have people here on enworld crying out things similar to "...this used to be free, why should we have to subscribe to DDI to get this kind of quality online content..." since DDI went live.

 

[Cadfan]

Perhaps you should address that to the person or company who wrote this:

Perhaps it would be interesting if you told us what you think this quote means in relation to this conversation.

Lots of other people have weighed in on it- in various threads, I myself have responded with my views on how the aspirations expressed in that quote relate to players and DMs versus how they relate to for-profit businesses.

But you, the person who continuously posts that quote, never ever say what YOU think.

 

[catsclaw227]

Perhaps you should address that to the person or company who wrote this:

Q: Is there an ethical reason to support Open Gaming?

A: In this writer's opinion, yes there is. It has been an established feature of RPGs since their inception that they should be used to create new content. Prior to the advent of widespread Open Game licenses, there was no practical way for that kind of material to be legally and widely distributed.

Open Gaming is recognition that your natural human right to free speech is protected and enhanced. The Open Game system is a way for the game publishing industry to finally deliver on the basic promises made by the very first RPGs; that individuals should be free to copy, modify and distribute their own creative works derived from the game systems they have acquired.

Is it possible that that particular writer is now wrong? In the light of evidence that other companies have taken WOTC properties, created games that DO NOT REQUIRE the PHB or any of the core 3.x D&D books (which is against the spirit of what WOTC was trying to accomplish with the OGL).

Let's face it, the company had it's trademarked products and it's rule system slightly tweaked, a whole slew of new games were derived and then sold to a group that didn't require the core D&D books; a group that might have otherwise bought 3.x core books instead.

I seem to think that the spirit of WOTC was trying to accomplish with Open Gaming changed when it stopped being neat fan sites and 3PP making stuff for D&D and changed into deriving works without paying all the R&D to create the game core system, and then profiting with the marketing angle that you don't need any of the WOTC books to play.

From here, it just looks like WOTC is protecting it's own product interests. Nothing wrong with that.

 

[Imaro]

It's simply human nature. Those used to getting something for free develop a sense of entitlement to that thing, and erroneously equate the cessation of that free supply to actual loss; and further develop the belief that someone NOT giving them something for free is therefore in the wrong.

A behavioral trait often displayed by children; most people grow out of it by the time they reach adulthood, but some never shake it.

Hmmm...wow. Ok, so am I "childish" if the 7 Eleven I have been going to for years suddenly decides that my 1.99 Big Gulp now has an added surcharge of .25 cents for the cup... and I am not happy about that and feel it is wrong since the cups have been free up until now? Am I somehow more mature because I just accept it and pay it?

I really feel like that last line is a little insulting (You know similar to the way some claim the "4E IS DUMBED DOWN" Line is just saying it's simplified but it still offends some). I mean it's cool to argue your side, but really the whole "child" line is a thinly veiled cheap shot because you have a differing view from some of the other posters.