4e D&D GSL Live

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I don't understand what WotC gains by 'turning' one of their greatest 3rd party supporters in this fashion.

I don't know. I'd ask Scott or Linae, but I don't think they can give us the answer who's behind the "Anti-Open" agenda. We only know (or at least infer) that they worked hard to give us the GSL.

I can only hope that whatever nameless entities in WotC were working against the OGL have some reasonable facts and sales number projecting backing them, and are not just doing it on the principle of "what, we pay money for it to be developed, others don't deserve to get it for free!"...

 

[Admiral Caine]

Pathfinder probably exists only because of the long delays in getting the GSL out...

I am not refuting this point, I certainly think it played an important role in Paizo's decision.

However based on comments made by Erik Mona (and Co.), I believe the decision had many layers to it, the delay being only one of them.

I can't see taking this license, even with ample prep time before coming to market. There's very little protection for a 3rd Party to make it worthwhile.

************

Slight change of subject, I am wondering if the reaction is strong enough if WOTC will offer special licenses to select partners (as in Necro), just to keep them from walking.

I know they haven't intimated any interest in doing that previously, but obviously times can change quickly with the rapid communication of this 21st century.

 

[Yair]

The interesting thing that for a product that is completely OGL (and there are only a few) that the original company couldn't publish the product after conversion but a third party could.

Because license grants the right to copy the OGL portions. So all new art will be needed but certain books could be preserved independently of what the Publisher decides.

While technically true, I think one could set up a new company, which is legally a different "person" so can derive material from the already published OGL. That this new person violates your copyright (by dressing your ideas in 3e cloth) is not, I think, something WotC can force you to sue over, or to disallow. At least under this iteration of the non-terminating clauses of the license.

Also, there is in principle nothing preventing the art from being OGL, though obviously this is not the case in practice.

 

[Lizard]

I want to make sure I'm not over-reacting.

Let's say I decide to take a homebrew setting, like my Shattered World campaign (game is going great, I've just been too busy to upgrade the blog), and produce a 4e version of it for commercial sale. Let us then speculate that, somehow, against all odds, it gets picked for some kind of movie/book/whatever deal.

Can WOTC basically kill it by sending me a C&D, as well as preventing me from releasing it under a different system? (OGL, my own house rules, whatever.)

I am not asking if it's likely that they WOULD; I'm asking if it's possible under the terms of the GSL.

'cause if it is, no one is going to risk releasing their 'crown jewel' IP under the GSL, or creating much original or interesting for it -- and maybe that's WOTCs plan, that what they want is very generic supplements which will not develop fan followings of their own, fan followings which will support the game world no matter what system it moves to.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey all!

Here is my question. If a third party was to publish a product with a Druid class and then Wizards were to come out with their own Druid, and updated the SRD to reflect this, the third party product would automatically be in violation of the GSL correct ??

This must be the single most important question the GSL raises that needs clarity.

If WotC can invalidate any Third Party Publishers 4E compatible product (and indeed potentially that whole product line) that was valid and compliant when it was released then surely the whole thing descends into madness.

We also need to know (and this point assumes a favourable result to Waylander's original point):

If I release a book with a Druid Class on October 1st 2008 and then WotC releases their version of the Druid in the Players Handbook II in June 2009 or whenever, can I, at a later date, release a future book that references my own Druid Class and not WotCs?

I don't mind sticking to the GSL as written but do I have to predict the future of the GSL as well? I'm not Doctor Who.

 

[MerricB]

Can WOTC basically kill it by sending me a C&D, as well as preventing me from releasing it under a different system? (OGL, my own house rules, whatever.)

They can stop you from publishing the 4e GSL version.

They can't stop you from publishing it using house rules.

It's fuzzy as to whether they can stop you from publishing it under the OGL later. (I suspect not, but IANAL and Clark is, and Clark is more dubious than me!)

Cheers!

 

[Yair]

I want to make sure I'm not over-reacting.

Let's say I decide to take a homebrew setting, like my Shattered World campaign (game is going great, I've just been too busy to upgrade the blog), and produce a 4e version of it for commercial sale. Let us then speculate that, somehow, against all odds, it gets picked for some kind of movie/book/whatever deal.

Can WOTC basically kill it by sending me a C&D, as well as preventing me from releasing it under a different system? (OGL, my own house rules, whatever.)

I don't see how. They can terminate your GSL license, and the GSL license forbids you from publishing the content under the OGL, but not under any other license. So you can't possibly release the content under the True20 system, but you could publish it with no specific license as a book, base a movie on it, or so on following normal copyright law.

That said, for every 4e product I make I'd first make a systemless product under no copyright license whatsoever. Just do it at small circulation, perhaps a PDF only. I could then publish the content under the OGL if the GSL is terminated, basing the OGL on the systemless version.

Or use some other legal trick.

 

[Yair]

If WotC can invalidate any Third Party Publishers 4E compatible product (and indeed potentially that whole product line) that was valid and compliant when it was released then surely the whole thing descends into madness.

Since WotC can change the license on a whim and need not justify terminating the license, they can do that regardless of the answer.

I don't mind sticking to the GSL as written but do I have to predict the future of the GSL as well? I'm not Doctor Who.

Just use your own PI. That way even WotC can't use the same names, since they would be derivative from you. "Gaelic Druids" is dangerous, WotC may use it. "Naerthian Priests of the Bloodied Tree" isn't.

 

[Garnfellow]

Clearly, as I understand that existing license, there wont be a "Tome of Horrors" for 4E. I'm not losing the right to make an OGL version. Period. In fact, I am pretty sure that I will be announcing a full color Pathfinder version of the Tome of Horrors shortly.

Emoticon or not, consider this your first pre-sale!

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hello Yair!

Since WotC can change the license on a whim and need not justify terminating the license, they can do that regardless of the answer.

Just use your own PI. That way even WotC can't use the same names, since they would be derivative from you. "Gaelic Druids" is dangerous, WotC may use it. "Naerthian Priests of the Bloodied Tree" isn't.

Its the principle of the thing. I'm not talking about breaking the existing GSL, I'm happy to comply with whats there, I'd even comply to future updates if and when they happen. Its about WotC having the ability to retcon something thats perfectly valid one minute and invalid the next - thus potentially destroying an entire product line.

This must be the first amendment (or clarification) to the GSL:

1a) Any product GSL compliant at time of release is not beholden to future updates to the GSL. Sales of these products can continue unchallenged.
1b) Any product can reference, though not reprint, material from a previously GSL compliant product, that has subsequently become invalid due to an update to the GSL.