D&D 5E Upcoming OGL-Related Announcement!

[Umbran]

Now, now. It can't happen three times.... can it?

You sound like a Baldesinger in a campaign I once played in, who said, "Oh, come on, guys! They can't *all* be trapp-*BOOM*!"

 

[Dausuul]

It goes on, but there are companies who certainly DO make a fuss about fan content and there were companies that even sued over products that happened to be compatible with their system.

Any examples of those suits being won, though? Granted, the threat alone can dissuade a lot of folks, but the Internet makes it a lot easier to learn the basics of copyright and trademark law than it was in the early '90s. It's no substitute for an actual lawyer, but it's enough for people to realize, "Hey--I have rights here. I don't have to just knuckle under the moment Kevin Siembada's lawyer sends me a mean letter. I wonder what Dave Kenzer charges for legal advice?"

 

[Umbran]

Re-reading the original article I sense a big [edited by legal department]. I feel there was a paragraph about 3PP, it just didn't make it

It may not even be legal. It could be marketing. If there is a plan for 3PP in the works, there may be a strategy for announcement, and that would include coordination with whatever 3PP have signed on.

 

[Morrus]

Any examples of those suits being won, though? Granted, the threat alone can dissuade a lot of folks, but the Internet makes it a lot easier to learn the basics of copyright and trademark law than it was in the early '90s. It's no substitute for an actual lawyer, but it's enough for people to realize, "Hey--I have rights here. I don't have to just knuckle under the moment Kevin Siembada's lawyer sends me a mean letter. I wonder what Dave Kenzer charges for legal advice?"

That's the thing, though. Even when you're right, legal advice and representation cost you money. If you get sued, you have to defend yourself. At least outside the US, loser pays costs which solves that problem.

 

[Umbran]

That's the thing, though. Even when you're right, legal advice and representation cost you money. If you get sued, you have to defend yourself. At least outside the US, loser pays costs which solves that problem.

Loser-pays is frequent in the US, but doesn't always apply.

Also, that's the loser paying in the end. Which could be a long time. In the meantime, you might have sales blocked pending decision. Some lawyers will give you the deal of "I'll take my fees when you win", but again, that's not universal. So, until the suit is done, there may be significant financial burdens.

And, if you were wrong, and you lose...

 

[Morrus]

Loser-pays is frequent in the US, but doesn't always apply.

Also, that's the loser paying in the end. Which could be a long time. In the meantime, you might have sales blocked pending decision. Some lawyers will give you the deal of "I'll take my fees when you win", but again, that's not universal. So, until the suit is done, there may be significant financial burdens.

And, if you were wrong, and you lose...

Sure. There's no version of being sued that's pleasant.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Yeah, that's part of why the "technically legal" ship probably won't get off the ground. Much easier just to go make D&D stuff under the OGL for Pathfinder -- there's definitely an audience, you're definitely legal (the purpose of a "safe harbor" is to make it clear that it's cool, even if the law is ambiguous), you're definitely working with a company that WANTS you to do it...

The only downside would be you're not plugging into the D&D audience, but in part because of PF's sales, the need to plug into that audience is less important than it was even back in 2008. It's not the only game in town, and even as the 900 lb gorilla, it's not as omnipresent as it once was. So while it sucks to cut that audience out, it might not be an audience worth going through a crappy license to get.

But a good license solves most of those problems, and they're clearly thinking long and hard about it, I just worry that they'll continue with something more like the GSL than is pleasant. I mean, there's a *reason* they put out the GSL, and thought it was fine. And I don't know that they still don't think that.

 

[Morrus]

But a good license solves most of those problems, and they're clearly thinking long and hard about it, I just worry that they'll continue with something more like the GSL than is pleasant. I mean, there's a *reason* they put out the GSL, and thought it was fine. And I don't know that they still don't think that.

The GSL has treated ENP just fine. The only danger is sudden revocation, but since they plan to leave the 4E online tools online until folks stop subscribing to them, I'm hopeful that won't be an issue.

 

[Lalato]

Do you think if the GSL had been there for 3.x instead of the OGL, people would have lauded it as much as they do the OGL? Honest question.

 

[Mistwell]

Reactionary? Yeah, to what Hasbro pulled with the 4E GSL. The OGL was WoTC's truest proof they were not the myopic corporation TSR had become. The GSL and it's implementation was the antithesis of that.
You already quoted what I am saying.
I'm expecting a similar situation to the 4E GSL with less transparency.

Actually I think the final GSL was a rather reasonable agreement and a lot of people have greatly exaggerated, or were simply misinformed, about what was in it. I think they remember the initial GSL, and never adjusted their views after the GSL was made much more reasonable (mostly I think due to negotiations with Necro games?)