Hey there Alzrius!
(trying to post over the past few nights and ENWorld kept kicking me out after about 15 minutes).
I know you have looked at the revised GSL, just curious about your thoughts?
I'm sorry U_K, I just now saw this post of yours. This is what I get for paying so little attention to the 4E thread.
In regards to the new GSL, I've looked at the side-by-side comparison done by Roger Carbol, and there seem to be four major areas of change. The first is that the SRD has been updated, with the GSL noting which books have been added. The second is that you may now produce "derivative" artwork of monsters (with several specific exceptions), the third one is that licensees may terminate their GSL participation at will, and the fourth is that there's no longer a clause regarding not-using products of the same "line" under the OGL if you use the GSL.
Overall, my thoughts about the new revisions can be summed up as "a tiny step forward." I'll try to go over this in more detail in regards to each of the four substantial updates:
New SRD Materials
It's nice that they added the new materials to the SRD; that's always a good thing. However, the use of this is largely undercut by the fact that you cannot reprint nor "redefine" things included under the GSL. All the expanded SRD really does is allow you to note new classes or monsters from the newer books, and make a note of which new book they're in (and you can't even list the page number, just something like "bard 7; see the PHB2" and the list of bard powers he took).
This, then, really seems like it's of minor use to publishers. Yes, you can take advantage of new 4E books...except you can't really reprint them, forcing you to assume that the players have access to that information. If your adventure has a bard, as noted above, you better hope someone has a PHB2, or access to the DDI, and has already made a full stat block for that NPC, because they're not going to be able to use that material otherwise. This will get worse as more splatbooks come out, which honestly seems like a roundabout way of forcing people to rely more on the DDI, since that'll be the easiest resource where everything will be in one place. In other words, this is of far less worth to third-parties than it otherwise seems.
Artwork
You're actually allowed to make artwork of the monsters now! Of course, there are a number of exceptions to this, but it's more than it was before. For most third-parties, this won't be a big deal, as the emphasis will be placed on new monsters for quite a while anyway. Still, it's good that you can at least make that succubus picture if you really want to. This is a definite step forward, though the restriction on archetypal D&D monsters does seem almost like a throwback to the old d20 STL (in spirit, at least).
Licensees May Terminate
This is somewhat better than it was, where you couldn't end your GSL agreement at all before. However, again, I'm not seeing what the major practical effect is here. Section 10.2 notes that sections 9-20 of the GSL will ALL survive the termination of the license, no matter who terminates it. This means that even after you quit using the GSL, you're still bound to help WotC protect their IP (section 9.3), defend and indemnify WotC in court (section 13), waive any kind of jury trail whatsoever, or any other kind of legal action outside of the state of Washington (section 18), and more.
I also consider the usefulness of voluntary severance on the part of the licensee to be rather undercut - consider, WotC may update the GSL at any time, and in doing so change any part of it (section 2), making you bound by the new terms. Technically, you can terminate your license as per section 10.1 if you don't like the changes. However, this is predicated on "A) ceasing use of all Licensed Materials, or B ) delivering to Wizards and executed 'Termination Notice' ". The problem with this is that, if you're a PDF publisher, and you don't
immediately stop selling PDFs when a new change comes out, you could very well unknowingly give away clause A, above - after all, you didn't cease selling License Materials after the new changes came out; hence, you're bound by whatever new terms are in the GSL.
Now, none of this seems very likely. WotC has been fairly straight with the third-party community so far. That said, it is still a legal possibility, and none of us knows what might happen in the future; whether it's a change in policy or leadership at WotC, an order from Hasbro, or what. You're basically at their mercy, from a legal standpoint.
OGL Use
This is the big one that'll have the largest practical effect on publishers. The GSL no longer mentions the OGL in any regard, freeing you in that aspect. Hence, you can make direct 4E conversions of 3.5 products and sell them under the same title and product line. You could even make a product that uses both 3.5 and 4E mechanics in it, though the FAQ notes that this would be very difficult to do.
Needless to say, this is great, because it doesn't cut you off from existing products you've already made, nor selling 3.5 versions of 4E products, etc. This is the only change that doesn't seem to be either largely invalidated by other sections, and is very welcome in that regard.
Summary
So, altogether, what has the revised GSL given to the third-party community? Well, a few more 4E references which you can't really put to good use, allowance to make artwork of most existing monsters, you can voluntarily terminate your license with it (assuming they don't get technical on you) but you'll still be bound by more than half of its clauses, and you don't have to give up any OGL products or product lines. And of course, a lot of the other uglier points like the vague blanket prohibition on adult or offensive content, or their ability to change things at will without notification, are still there.
Overall, this is an improvement, but only in regards to OGL products, and I suppose in making new artwork of monsters. The termination clause and new SRD material have very little practical impact, and don't seem to really make any real improvements at all. Is the new GSL better? Yes, undeniably, but to such a degree that it's really only a tiny step forward.
