D&D Fan Site Toolkit

[Nagol]

Why not? Each room in that context is its own "product."

-O

Because that's what the license says.

Could you create individual rooms in standard html / blogging software? No. (not a format supported by Section 3 and specifically called out in 5.5)

Could you create individual rooms and publish each in a separate pdf? Yes.

Can you link those rooms together with an overview map and have the users come back and download them as necessary? No. (Stops being a single-download book format as you need multiple downloads to acquire the dungeon.)

Can you create a variety of pdfs that represent the adventure as it grows day by day so people can download their preferred point in the product evolution? Yes. (Each pdf is self-contained and would count as a single-download book format)

Do these rules make a whole lot of sense in this situation? No.

3. Licensed Products. The license granted in Section 4 is for use solely in connection with Licensee’s publication, distribution, and sale of roleplaying games and roleplaying game supplements that contain the Licensed Materials and are published in a hardcover or soft-cover printed book format or in a single-download electronic book format (such as .pdf) , and accessory products to the foregoing roleplaying games and roleplaying

5.5 Licensed Products. This License applies solely to Licensed Products as defined in Section 3 and to the specified uses set forth in Section 4. For the avoidance of doubt, and by way of example only, no Licensed Product will (a) include web sites, interactive products, miniatures, or character creators; (b) describe a process for creating a character or applying the effects of experience to a character; (c) use the terms “Core Rules” or “Core Rulebook” or variations thereof on its cover or title, in self-reference or in advertising or marketing thereof; (d) refer to any artwork, imagery or other depiction contained in a Core Rulebook; (e) reprint any material contained in a Core Rulebook except as explicitly provided in Section 4; or (f) be incorporated into another product that is itself not a Licensed Product (such as, by way of example only, a magazine or book compilation).

* Highlighting has been added.

 

[Morrus]

It can't.

Correct. It's simply a "we made these cool images for you and you can use them if you agree to this deal" type affair.

 

[Umbran]

But it still leaves us wondering what WotC's web site policy is...

That is true.

Here's the thing I think folks are missing: Fansite policy is never going to be treated as a binding contract. Given that, the question, then is not, "What's the Policy?" but instead, "Is WotC going to be a bunch of jerks about fansites?"

If they are jerks, their stated policy is not relevant - if they don't like the results, they'll change the policy and then come after you. The policy gives you no real protection or assurance, so why bother?

If they aren't going to be jerks, they don't need to state a policy, because if there's a problem they'll enter into a polite discussion about it before doing nasty things. So again, why bother? Unless they find they have to enter in many such discussions, it is better for the fans to leave it open and not artificially restrict people before the fact.

 

[Ashtagon]

Correct. It's simply a "we made these cool images for you and you can use them if you agree to this deal" type affair.

Exactly. By accepting that "policy" (ie "contract") you are signing away some rights that you would normally have had.

 

[Fifth Element]

I will not be complying with this edict vis my D&D fansite.

Which edict is that?

 

[freyar]

That is true.

Here's the thing I think folks are missing: Fansite policy is never going to be treated as a binding contract. Given that, the question, then is not, "What's the Policy?" but instead, "Is WotC going to be a bunch of jerks about fansites?"

If they are jerks, their stated policy is not relevant - if they don't like the results, they'll change the policy and then come after you. The policy gives you no real protection or assurance, so why bother?

If they aren't going to be jerks, they don't need to state a policy, because if there's a problem they'll enter into a polite discussion about it before doing nasty things. So again, why bother? Unless they find they have to enter in many such discussions, it is better for the fans to leave it open and not artificially restrict people before the fact.

What concerns me is whether or not this policy/license will convince people, in particular the people running certain fansites, that WotC is going to be jerky (to use your words). To use one example, Candlekeep has held back their latest issue of the Candlekeep Compendium for about a year waiting for this policy, and this might convince them that they need to cancel the whole thing. Hopefully not.

 

[Fifth Element]

According to a post on another board, Black's Law Dictionary (7th ed. 1999) defines disparagement as: "A false and injurious statement that discredits or detracts from the reputation of another's property, product, or business. To recover in tort for disparagement, the plaintiff must prove that the statement caused a third party to take some action resulting in specific pecuniary loss to the plaintiff."

So it has a legal meaning, and it appears to be in the same realm as libel and dishonesty.

 

[Dragonhelm]

What concerns me is whether or not this policy/license will convince people, in particular the people running certain fansites, that WotC is going to be jerky (to use your words). To use one example, Candlekeep has held back their latest issue of the Candlekeep Compendium for about a year waiting for this policy, and this might convince them that they need to cancel the whole thing. Hopefully not.

It's a policy that may keep many fansites from pursuing 4th edition altogether. Which, in turn, is counterproductive to what WotC wants.

Some fan sites may decide it isn't worth it anymore, which will leave many disappointed fans.

 

[thedungeondelver]

Which edict is that?

I'm taking the EULA thing they put in the "fan kit" as a whole, as an edict.

 

[Dannager]

It's a policy that may keep many fansites from pursuing 4th edition altogether. Which, in turn, is counterproductive to what WotC wants.

Some fan sites may decide it isn't worth it anymore, which will leave many disappointed fans.

I really don't think this will happen. Has anyone taken any content off their site that was there yesterday as a result of this action?