4e D&D GSL Live

[JRRNeiklot]

What I'm missing is why it's essential to change the original rather than offering an alternative. Is it really the author's place to remove options from the end user?

Why not? Didn't WOTC's authors do just that?

 

[chriton227]

I believe in people's IP rights. Nevertheless, I have no intention of being a contracted, occasionally paid snitch a la 10.3.

And according to the 11.2 Survival portion, section 10 remains in force after the termination of the license, so if you accept the license you will always be required to be a contracted, occasionally paid snitch.

With the long lasting ramification of the license, and the number of things that are permanantly in Wizards favor compared to the number of things that Wizards can revoke from the licensee at will, I really don't expect to see many 3PPs being willing to agree to the GSL. It feels almost as if they tried to make it so oppressive that no one would be willing to accept the terms, effectively stopping 3PP 4e products while still being able to say that they are open and willing to allow 3PP 4e products.

 

[w_earle_wheeler]

OK, maybe someone can explain this to me in layman's terms.

As I understand it, if you publish under the GSL, then you agree not to publish under the OGL. However, you CAN go back to the OGL, BUT if you do so, you will never be granted the right to use the GSL again.

Is this correct, or is it: if you publish under the GSL, you can never publish under the OGL again, even if you stop using the GSL.

 

[pemerton]

Roughly, if you publish something under the GSL, then you come under a contractual obligation never to publish something having "the same or similar title, product line trademark, or contents" under the OGL. The relevant clause of the GSL is 6.2.