4e D&D GSL Live

[Dirt]

I'm not a lawyer, so this comment may smack of ignorance, but...

Is there anything keeping a gaming company from creating a new company (incorporating under a slightly different name and keeping the accounting books seperate) to publish 4E material (while still being able to publish 3E under the old company)?

 

[Friadoc]

Nah, we've a lot more safe habors now than we did when 2e was out; Paizo, Green Ronin, and others will grow into stronger companies thanks to this move by WotC.

In my opinion, as has been reflected on here a lot, is that the OGL is a superior thing to the GSL and it'll play out that way.

I've enjoyed playing 4e, but not to the point that I'll ditch everyone else for it.

I think, for the foreseeable future, WotC has my sci-fi dollars, with Star Wars Saga Edition stuff, but my fantasy dollar is going to go elsewhere.

Paizo is my master now.

 

[Friadoc]

I'm not a lawyer, so this comment may smack of ignorance, but...

Is there anything keeping a gaming company from creating a new company (incorporating under a slightly different name and keeping the accounting books seperate) to publish 4E material (while still being able to publish 3E under the old company)?

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 insulate 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*

 

[Brown Jenkin]

I have a question. Can a company protect its inventory from being destroyed after termination by creating another separate "distribution company" for warehousing/distribution. The GSL states that all product in the licensee's possession needs to be destroyed. So to protect oneselves wouldn't it be smart to sell all product after printing to a separate "distribution company." The deal between publisher and new distribution "company" could then be set up legally so that the distribution company only has to pay for product after it resells it to someone else and the publishing company is responsible to cover warehouse fees, or the "distribution company" in turn rents space from the publisher to store unsold product.

 

[Cassandra]

Is there anything keeping a gaming company from creating a new company (incorporating under a slightly different name and keeping the accounting books seperate) to publish 4E material (while still being able to publish 3E under the old company)?

It depends on whether the company is trying to publish the same material under both systems. If not, there would be no problem - but no real reason to do it, either.

On the other hand, the GSL seems to specifically prohibit a company from making that kind of end run to be able to publish the same material as 3E and 4E:

In the event that any portion of a Converted OGL Product Line is manufactured or published by Licensee, or a third party affiliated with Licensee, after the first publication date of a Conversion, Wizards may immediately terminate this License upon written notice.

(Emphasis mine.) Once a product line has been switched to 4E, neither the original publisher nor anyone affiliated with them can publish the material as 3E anymore. To me, that sounds broad enough to disqualify the "different company, same owners" ploy.

 

[Yair]

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.

I agree that this would go a long way towards making the license more agreeable. This is definitely not, however, the current license.

 

[RSKennan]

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

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

 

[Yair]

Going on from this...
Someone explain this to me please. Can I publish under GSL say a book on new and not defined rules, say for example "romance rules" for 4e and another game system and include some reference to the other game system's product line in the book? Is such a reference (or even call it advertisement) prohibited by GSL?

I.... think you can. Can't see where it says you can't. I know Atlas Games did similar things with some of its books (the Penumbra series, I think) under the old STL, I think you can do so under the GSL too.

I'm not a lawyer, so this comment may smack of ignorance, but...

Is there anything keeping a gaming company from creating a new company (incorporating under a slightly different name and keeping the accounting books seperate) to publish 4E material (while still being able to publish 3E under the old company)?

It's not like I'm a lawyer, but as I understand the issue: the license does attempt to limit this, but I don't think it can since one legal person isn't really bound by the actions of another in general. So the license may say that your affiliates should not publish Converted material, but your affiliates aren't really under any obligation to cease and desist. As long as you use the GSL I think Wizards can then sue you for what your affiliates are doing, and you'd have to pay their trial costs too; but if the license is terminated, I don't think that would fly.

I have a question. Can a company protect its inventory from being destroyed after termination by creating another separate "distribution company" for warehousing/distribution. The GSL states that all product in the licensee's possession needs to be destroyed. So to protect oneselves wouldn't it be smart to sell all product after printing to a separate "distribution company." The deal between publisher and new distribution "company" could then be set up legally so that the distribution company only has to pay for product after it resells it to someone else and the publishing company is responsible to cover warehouse fees, or the "distribution company" in turn rents space from the publisher to store unsold product.

Yeah, this looks like a good idea - store all your published books in a "seperate" company, isolated legally from your publishing arm.

 

[Dias Ex Machina]

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

That is the funniest sh$%^ I have read all day. I needed that from the depressing posts I have been reading.

 

[dmccoy1693]

Paizo is my master now.

Couldn't have put it better.

Long Live Paizo. Long Live the OGL​