Search results

Hrm...I was just told by the phone-in-commentator rent-seeking behavior isn't rent-seeking behavior because he thinks that the point of the rent-seeking is to prevent the growth of large competitors, so yeah... joe b.

Yes, his commentary is less useful than would be a simple slow-scroll through the entire document. (part of the reason why I dislike video as an information distribution method-the creator of the content is far more front-and-centered than I prefer). joe b.

Yep, looks like it. joe b.

I also think it important to remember that the purchase of D&D Beyond from Fandom for $146.3 million has just occurred. That's a large amount to be moving out, even with WotC's size. joe b.

If you could point me in the right direction of that thought, I'd appreciate it. It's one I haven't seen before. joe b.

I think the tactics WotC has used (exclusively sending contract to major players with beneficial terms prior to any others knowing about the changes- ie. a 'coup' of the major players prior to public announcement) imply that they know they cannot revoke the license. Lawfare was not the intent in...

It is hard to deny that the relationship seems to have turned adversarial. joe b.

I'd add the caveat, excepting when the 1.1 released OGC is exactly the same as the 1.0 released OGC, which I suspect a lot of it going to be if things are supposed to be as powerfully backwards compatible as insinuated.

I just want to say thanks to both of you for taking the time to discuss this. joe b.

(Potentially silly) Question: There have been several 3PP of the SRD (cleaned up [formatting wise] and grouped together into a single searchable [sometimes hyperlinked] document) that have been released as independently-named works with a separate section 15 entry. Lets call this type of work...

Ah, I see. Yes, we do differ there. I'd expect that all of those responses are something that anyone with a modicum of foresight would have fully anticipated before deciding upon something as significant as a lawfare "revoke the OGL" decision. I assume that all of these downsides would have...

Somehow I managed to say the opposite of what I meant. sigh Sorry about that! I meant to say is, "If lawfare is the intended process for the "revoke it" idea, what is the reason as to why WotC is still discussing it?" ie. if they had already decided that nuking-it-all was the plan they were...

Yeah, that's the truth. I can absolutely see the nuclear option being considered now, but I do think that means that it hadn't been decided upon before the NoOgl was released (or in this case, leaked right before release). And for me, that does change how I weigh things. joe "it's very tiring...

I think a lot of people are underestimating the amount of money that passionate gamers will donate to prevent the games they like to play from no longer being able to be supported by the companies that (in many cases) wouldn't be able to continue to exist without the revenue streams from those...

What I'm wondering is if it may hint that the lawfare option actually wasn't on the table when the NoOgl was conceived and planned for release on the 4th. If it had been discussed and agree upon as the course of action beforehand, there shouldn't be any internal dissension right now as that...

I wouldn't be surprised if there would be a crowd-funding for the legal costs for Paizo, of which almost the entire OGL community would gladly support. It would be a huge boon for Paizo as they are, IMO, being effectively forced to go to court if the "revoked" aspect is not relented upon. But...

And it's this that has me wondering about the timing. If lawfare is the intended process for the "revoke it" idea, what is the reason as to why WotC is no longer discussing it? [[EDIT: somehow I ended up saying the opposite of what I meant to say. I meant to say "If lawfare is the intended...

Question: is this case that is complicated enough to where such expensive legal maneuverings could be done? Obviously, I'm not a lawyer, but it doesn't seem like there's a lot of depth to it? It honestly doesn't seem that complex. joe b.

I sincerely hope that this is not the case. joe b.

Yes. There is no uncertainty regarding the intent of the OGL when it was framed.