4e D&D GSL Live

[Sunderstone]

Meh, Ive seen this before....

As soon as Darth Hasbro realizes that Luke Paizowalker, Pramas Leia, Han Necro and the rest of the Third Party Rebellion is stronger than they thought, the better.

Cant we just skip right to D&D Wars Epsiode VI : Return of the OGL?

Meh. Spike tv reruns all over again.

 

[alanpossible]

Just a thought....

But is there anything to stop someone from developing 4e material under the GSL and then releasing *their* IP to the public domain?

Seems like an obvious loophole is for someone/some group of people to develop a perfectly legitimate and compatible Wizarde, Kleric, Fightar, Elhf, Harfling, ... and make them freely available for anyone to use and copy.

It would be like developing an OGL under the GSL

Just curious

You can only enter into Public Domain something that is entirely yours (as you mentioned, IP). However, any (I mean any reference) to 4th Edition is used only by WotC's permission. For example, you could not use the name kobold and reference or redefine it using 4th Edition rules and make it public domain.

A publisher cannot even reproduce rules in 4th Edition. The only thing you could put up as Public Domain is flavor text, original names (names of powers, rituals, characters, and so forth, that you created, but not the acutally mechanics.)

So the short answer is no, but a good thought. There is one exeption -70 years after the authors death (unless an extention is filed by relatives or a corporation) their work is automatically submitted into the public domain.

I don't know about anybody else, but I am counting the days .

heh
But surely you could produce a product that conforms to the GSL and release your contributions in that document as public domain? If I create a Fightar then it's a class not defined by Wizards (allowing me to define it) and if the flavour text, powers, etc. are all original, then it's entirely my property. I haven't actually used anything of Wizards', I've just ensured my material is compatible with 4e. There aren't any mechanics specified - you still need the PHB for those. But there'd be much more material to use, people could reproduce your public domain monster stat blocks in adventures, for example.

I am by no means a lawyer, and am only vaguely familiar with UK IP laws, so I could be talking rubbish, of course.

My understanding was that some of the 3e publishers did something similar - they'd release a product, and reference the SRD where necessary. In the legalese at the front they had words to the effect of "Some of the text in this book is part of the SRD, owned by Wizards of the coast and freely available. The remainder is owned, copyrighted, trademarked, whatever to us. We will break your legs if you reproduce it."

I hope so, if only because I want to play a Harfling Rouge or a Dorf Fightar.

Agh! I completely forgot about the commonly referenced fantasy class, Rouge.

I will await your release of this class in to the public domain so that it may be used ;D

 

[CapnZapp]

Not really, heck fiction authors, for years, have been using simple aliases to work for various publishers, and it hasn't caused them too much trouble.

I mean, if you can create a company to insult yourself, as an individual, from the failing of said company, I don't see why you couldn't do it to insult yourself from a restrictive license.

Of course, as with many of us, I am not a lawyer. but the concept seems simple enough; of course, I could have just hung myself with that statement. *chuckles*

Insult or insulate?

 

[occam]

And this entire section will survive termination of the agreement.

This, I think, is one of the more thought provoking clauses. If a publisher converts a product line from OGL to GSL, and then the agreement is terminated - for whatever reason - then section 6.1 will still be in effect. So the publisher could not then revert a GSL converted product line back to the OGL.

This section may add fuel to the conspiracy theories. But this section may also be one that holds some third party publishers back. If there is a successful brand that the publisher has already built, will they want to tie that brand into 4E? Because once they do, they can't fall back to the strength of that brand if the agreement is terminated for any reason.

I'm taken aback at how many are surprised by these terms in the GSL. Didn't we know all this already?

Of course WotC wouldn't allow conversion of a product/product line to the GSL, then back to the OGL for any reason. That would permit a licensee to produce 4e-compatible products, then when the initial surge of purchases was done, republish them as 3e-compatible OGC, completely negating the intent of the GSL. You may argue with that intent, but we had already heard about this one-time conversion idea months ago, I thought.

Also, as far as the terms of conversion surviving termination of the license, that should also have been expected. Given what we know or could surmise about WotC's goals with the new license, they wouldn't set it up so that 3PPs could pull all their goodies out of WotC's sandbox and into post-3e OGC-land when, say, a new edition comes out with (potentially) a new license. Permanent conversion is necessary to keep 3PPs in the market supporting WotC's products going forward, which is the entire point of the license, after all.

Displeasure with aspects of the GSL is inevitable, but surprise? Were people really not expecting this?

 

[Friadoc]

Insult or insulate?

I swear, I gotta love my ignorant, crippled fingers and their desire to punish me for the years of abuse.

Insulate, obviously. *laughs*

 

[Voadam]

I'm taken aback at how many are surprised by these terms in the GSL. Didn't we know all this already?

Of course WotC wouldn't allow conversion of a product/product line to the GSL, then back to the OGL for any reason. That would permit a licensee to produce 4e-compatible products, then when the initial surge of purchases was done, republish them as 3e-compatible OGC, completely negating the intent of the GSL. You may argue with that intent, but we had already heard about this one-time conversion idea months ago, I thought.

Also, as far as the terms of conversion surviving termination of the license, that should also have been expected. Given what we know or could surmise about WotC's goals with the new license, they wouldn't set it up so that 3PPs could pull all their goodies out of WotC's sandbox and into post-3e OGC-land when, say, a new edition comes out with (potentially) a new license. Permanent conversion is necessary to keep 3PPs in the market supporting WotC's products going forward, which is the entire point of the license, after all.

Displeasure with aspects of the GSL is inevitable, but surprise? Were people really not expecting this?

No, I was not expecting a (possibly not legally enforceable) clause attempting to impose permanent post license termination restrictions on nonGSL stuff.

There were discussions about the "poison pill" provision and people expecting it to apply so long as you were under the license.

This is like a permanent noncompete clause attached to an at will emplyment contract.

 

[Orcus]

To my mind, the question is -- would WOTC be dumb enough to try to shut down people making things liks PCGen for 4e as non-profit, not-for-sale products?

Manu shc products for 3x (not PCgen in particular, but others) either skirted the bounds of the OGL or danced merrily across them. WOTC ignored them, recognizing the cost in goodwill of shutting down non-commercial enterprises that didn't directly compete with their products was too high. But now (well, a few months from now....) there's DDI and Gleemax and suddenly Happy Bob's Cool Character Spreadsheet becomes, if not an actual threat to profits, at least something which is the teensiest tiniest bit competitive..,.and that can make companies do stupid things.

My guess is that they would. I would if I was them. I hate to say it. Given that they are driving people to Gleemax. Under 3E there really wasnt any relevant product the generators were fighting. Thats not the case for 4E and they spent a TON on money on the digital initiative. Plus, look at how the did the SRD. THEY want to be the purveyors of the content and the dreamers of dreams.

 

[Orcus]

I don't want to put words into your mouth, but given your sceptical tone about the availability of remedies for a breach of the backwards conversion clause, does that mean you think that it is a bit of a storm in a teacup (from the point of view of liability, as opposed to WoTC marketing)?

Well, I guess you could always argue third party stuff is a teapot (I dont happen to feel that way but some do).

No, I think this is a huge issue. Basically, the only real way to release thrid party content now is either the OGL which is timeless or the GSL which is revocable. I wouldnt be so enthusiastic in believing that 5E will have a GSL since there seems to be a corporate trend away from openness and frankly I think that Wizards would have killed the GSL had they been willing to take the PR hit and had their not been true heroes of third party support like Scott and Linae. So given that you have those two choices for distributing your content, if 4E native products also cannot ever be OGL products (like converted products) then essentially you are choosing by making a product in 4E to never be able to publish it again. I guess it is possible, but my guess is that the OGL is going to be the only way for you to ever publish D&D compatible game content in the future once the GSL is revoked and one day it will be revoked. So, no, this isnt a tempest in a tea pot. If 6.2 really means that I cant ever make an OGL version of a native 4E product (not a converted product), then that is a big problem in my mind.

 

[Orcus]

Reading the license, which is really a pretty insulting document, I was wondering why they even bothered making a GSL since they made sure in a lot of ways that no one far enough on the evolutionary scale to stand upright would ever use it. Why just not have a license and save the lawyer fees?

Insulting to who? I plan on using the license. Maybe not for everything. But I sure intend to use it. I must not be that far on the evolutionary scale My wife might agree...

Clark

 

[RSKennan]

heh

Agh! I completely forgot about the commonly referenced fantasy class, Rouge.

I will await your release of this class in to the public domain so that it may be used ;D

Well, I'm thinking about asking my "illiterate cousin Jimmy" if he wants to dictate a new RPG. His mom has been reading him RPGs and he's got some ideas for one. Would it be ok to use your class and race names?