(DRM, etc) Too much time thinking...

[The Sigil]

Just a hypothetical here...

Remember the tempest that went up from among the publishers when their "rights" to use the SRD were curbed somewhat by the addition of (1) quality standards to the d20STL and (2) the addition of a dubious Product Identity clause to the 3.5 SRD? That they were exceedingly upset that WotC was trying to "limit" them in some way?

Now some of those same publishers are turning around and slapping DRM with copy/paste limitations on their own works. Do you think that publishers would get pissed off at WotC if the SRD version 3.6 came with the same Digital Restrictions as their own PDFs do? Set aside for a moment the "easy workarounds" - the SRD is free, so you download 100 copies, then the copy/paste problem isn't so bad... yadda yadda yadda... suppose for a moment WotC had a way of enforcing 10 copy/pastes per 10 days on each publisher.

Do you think third-party publishers would be upset? Would ANY publisher find this acceptable? Not just in a "resigned to it" way, but in a "yeah, this is an upgrade in utility for me" way.

Does anyone else find this ironic that some of the same people who were railing against WotC for "taking away" their "rights to use material as they see fit" are now taking away the "rights" of others to use THEIR material?

I'm not trying to indict any specific publisher, I just find it odd that the same people who were very vocal in saying "we have a right to use IP in the way we see fit" are now trying to restrict that "right of use" among others?

I am very uncomfortable with that thought. I hope it's not true, but it's been eating at me the last 24 hours. I like a lot of the people in this business, but what seems to me like doublethink makes me uncomfortable because I want to believe these guys are good guys and would "do unto others" as they would have done to them... and this just doesn't seem to be the way to go about it. I wonder, have the publishers even thought of it in these terms? Do they care?

Like I said, too much thinking...

--The Sigil

 

[Jeremy Ackerman-Yost]

Nah. Sounds like you spent about the right amount of time thinking to me.

 

[Henry]

Actually, I don't remember the "same" publishers doing it. The ones who I remember were most vocal on the product identity issue with the SRD are also most vocal on the DRM policies of Drive-Thru, as well. I don't recall any specific stand-outs, and I'm certainly not asking you to name any, but I'm also not recalling any specific "hypocrisies", so to speak.

 

[Psion]

Does anyone else find this ironic that some of the same people who were railing against WotC for "taking away" their "rights to use material as they see fit" are now taking away the "rights" of others to use THEIR material?

Um, most of the people who had real problems with it were not the big publishers involved in DTRPG, but small fry one-man ops mad that they could not put breastages in their products and use someone elses generously donated advertising to do it.

Further, I do not perceive this situation as the same sort of tempest in a teapot situation that was, though I realize that some people might think so at first glance.

No irony or hypocrisy to be had here. Move along.

 

[The Sigil]

Actually, I don't remember the "same" publishers doing it. The ones who I remember were most vocal on the product identity issue with the SRD are also most vocal on the DRM policies of Drive-Thru, as well. I don't recall any specific stand-outs, and I'm certainly not asking you to name any, but I'm also not recalling any specific "hypocrisies", so to speak.

http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=63042

Without naming names, that thread (and the links contained therein), cross-referenced with a list of vendors at DriveThruRPG.com might get you started. I haven't checked for sure myself to give you point by point references, but there you go.

--The Sigil

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=63042

Without naming names, that thread (and the links contained therein), cross-referenced with a list of vendors at DriveThruRPG.com might get you started. I haven't checked for sure myself to give you point by point references, but there you go.

--The Sigil

I don't see the parallels, Sig.

So, err, I guess it is too much thinking.


Wulf

 

[The Sigil]

I don't see the parallels, Sig.

So, err, I guess it is too much thinking.


Wulf

Probably is. I was going by "emotional memory" (i.e., feelings I remembered seeing about the d20STL change) rather than "intellectual memory" (i.e., remembering a specific saying or post). I'll stop thinking now.

--The Sigil

 

[Funksaw]

Just a hypothetical here...

Remember the tempest that went up from among the publishers when their "rights" to use the SRD were curbed somewhat by the addition of (1) quality standards to the d20STL and (2) the addition of a dubious Product Identity clause to the 3.5 SRD? That they were exceedingly upset that WotC was trying to "limit" them in some way?

Now some of those same publishers are turning around and slapping DRM with copy/paste limitations on their own works. Do you think that publishers would get pissed off at WotC if the SRD version 3.6 came with the same Digital Restrictions as their own PDFs do? Set aside for a moment the "easy workarounds" - the SRD is free, so you download 100 copies, then the copy/paste problem isn't so bad... yadda yadda yadda... suppose for a moment WotC had a way of enforcing 10 copy/pastes per 10 days on each publisher.

Do you think third-party publishers would be upset? Would ANY publisher find this acceptable? Not just in a "resigned to it" way, but in a "yeah, this is an upgrade in utility for me" way.

Does anyone else find this ironic that some of the same people who were railing against WotC for "taking away" their "rights to use material as they see fit" are now taking away the "rights" of others to use THEIR material?

I'm not trying to indict any specific publisher, I just find it odd that the same people who were very vocal in saying "we have a right to use IP in the way we see fit" are now trying to restrict that "right of use" among others?

I am very uncomfortable with that thought. I hope it's not true, but it's been eating at me the last 24 hours. I like a lot of the people in this business, but what seems to me like doublethink makes me uncomfortable because I want to believe these guys are good guys and would "do unto others" as they would have done to them... and this just doesn't seem to be the way to go about it. I wonder, have the publishers even thought of it in these terms? Do they care?

Like I said, too much thinking...

--The Sigil

I don't know what the hell it is about the RPG business, but for some reason publishing an RPG tends to turn people into jerks. Not the same type of jerk, but everyone who's published an RPG tends to act like a jerk in some way. Three days ago, I'd have listed the guys at Eden Studios and the guys at Guardians of Order as the exception that proves the rule...

The guys who publish RPGs will always be jerks. The new edition will cost 33% more and be released just after you finished buying the old edition. Their own web forums will be full of trolls or full of censorship - most likely both - they'll lose the love of creation and instead discard innovation in the long term for profits in the short term. They'll discontinue thier old lines to give something more focus group approved a whirl, they'll be late with printing, they'll be neurotic over copyright issues and sometimes they'll smell.

And most gamers will come back for more.

This deepens the problem, because, hell, why should RPG publishers care how they treat customers? The customer buy the product anyway - and in the case of one publisher in particular - they actually believe that customer dissatisfaction increases sales. They may actually be right, because the typical, non-internet, non-savvy, uninformed gamer/consumer, typically will just shut the hell up.

DRM is the exception to this rule, mostly because PDF buyers are typically the "informed" consumer, but also because DRM is something which is at the center of a controversy of it's own - a current war on culture, started by the consolidation of media and it's only going to get worse from here on out.

 

[hong]

Holy crap! It's Funksaw!

 

[Asmor]

Isn't there some clause in the OGL that says you can use any previously published version of it at your own discretion, thereby making any restriction not in every version (for example the first version) moot?