4e D&D GSL Live

[Lord Xtheth]

Well, now that I've read the entire thing word for word, one part of the GSL kinda jumped out at me, especially after Wizards expressly forbids us stealing their intelectual property.

18. Independent Development. Nothing in this License will impair Wizards’ right to acquire, license, develop, have others develop for it, market and/or distribute materials or products that contain concepts, storylines, or other content similar to, or otherwise compete with, Licensed Products.

Legalese to english translation:
Wizards may take your intelectual property you wrote using this liscence and use it themselves in part or in whole if they wish.

I mean, I still want to publish D&D material, but come on, if I write an epic adventure (Which I did) Wizards is stating that it can take the whole storyline I wrote and make their own exact copy if they want, and I can't do anything about it?

 

[jgerman]

I really don't see a reason for excluding demons and devils. Some of those were based on creatures pulled from mythology, so Wizards doesn't own them to begin with.

They don't own them, however, if you accept the GSL and publish under that license you'll have to act as if they do.

 

[Henry]

Sure - but then they lose the name recognition of their DCC brand.

That doesn't seem like a huge worry -- they had to build the name recognition of Dungeon Crawl Classics in the first place. Also, given the 3e / 4e divide that looks like it's shaping up, the people buying DCC are likely as not to be buying any 4e stuff from Goodman. I'd think they were better served selling to both crowds, but that's just me.

I mean, I still want to publish D&D material, but come on, if I write an epic adventure (Which I did) Wizards is stating that it can take the whole storyline I wrote and make their own exact copy if they want, and I can't do anything about it?

To be fair, that's not really different from the OGL. Note "similar to" not "identical". I don't think WotC has ever had an interest in nabbing another person's idea whole cloth. I've seen parallel development, but frankly it's more likely to be a small person jumping THEIR ideas, not the other way around.

 

[Alzrius]

True, but a ruling for WoTC would set precedent that games CAN be copyrighted, and also I don't believe they will let the OGL be used to rip off all their property if they decide not to use it anymore (as well as completely change the game system so it has little resemblance to the older game).

No such ruling would ever happen. It'd completely fly in the face of existing law and drastically alter existing copyright rules. And I do believe that WotC will let the OGL be used to create a compatible game, since (a) they can't stop someone from doing it, and (b) don't want a court decision defending peoples' right to do it.

I believe that the reason is not legal but "we don't care about the old forms of the games, we don't support it". It's a bigger situation with 4e however.

That might be their stated reason. However, they still could have sent a cease and desist letter at any time, for virtually no cost, but never did. I think that'd be the same here. Either way, I think we'll likely soon find out.

 

[Mephistopheles]

I really don't see a reason for excluding demons and devils. Some of those were based on creatures pulled from mythology, so Wizards doesn't own them to begin with.

I think Disney manage to do a decent job of mining the public domain for their movies and then inappropriately holding onto them under copyright law. I'm not going to attribute any motives to WotC but I suppose it's possible they're attempting something similar.

 

[Glyfair]

Legalese to english translation:
Wizards may take your intelectual property you wrote using this liscence and use it themselves in part or in whole if they wish.

That's not how I read it. The "Nothing in this License will impair Wizards’ right..." seems to just be saying you don't get any additional protection from such things because of the license. They aren't getting any additional rights, just asserting that nothing here is giving away any of those rights.

I think they are particularly protecting themselves from such things as Necromancer creating a 4E bard before WotC and trying to claim that WotC couldn't publish it (not that they would try to).

 

[Nellisir]

I mean, I still want to publish D&D material, but come on, if I write an epic adventure (Which I did) Wizards is stating that it can take the whole storyline I wrote and make their own exact copy if they want, and I can't do anything about it?

I don't think so, actually. They can "acquire" it, but not "seize. I am not a lawyer, but I'm pretty certain the license doesn't give them the unilateral right to take your concepts without giving something in return. It does give them the right to function without the license, however.

And I just have to say, this is almost exactly what I was expecting.

Ironically, it'll make a 4e Tome of Horrors and similar products even more desirable and bigger competition for the Monster Manual if Clark does what I think he'll do, and add a seperate license permitting 4e 3rd party publishers to use material in his books at the cost of opening up your own product in a like manner. That'd create an independant pool of 3rd party design material to draw upon, unconnected to WotC's proprietary pool.

 

[JohnRTroy]

Independent Development isn't meant for them to "(kill you and) take your stuff"

It's meant to protect them from somebody suing them for having a legitimate parallel idea. This happens. If they don't have this you'll get people claiming their "Book of the Undead" has concepts similar to the third party one published 2 months ago.

 

[Lord Xtheth]

Independent Development isn't meant for them to "(kill you and) take your stuff"

It's meant to protect them from somebody suing them for having a legitimate parallel idea. This happens. If they don't have this you'll get people claiming their "Book of the Undead" has concepts similar to the third party one published 2 months ago.

Yes, I very much don't want to be killed, and my stuff to be taken. Well, off to the printer so I can sign the agreement, and start convering!

 

[Lord Xtheth]

One more general question. I didn't see it in the liscence, but if you're unsure about your contents "conformity" to the rules, do we have the ability to ask for a review?

(My campaign is a general horror based meat-grinder) I don't know if it's "too violent" for this GSL or not.