Fan-made material impossible until 2009?

[SteveC]

Well, see the thing is, back in the TSR days, they considered the "some guy on the Internet" license to be copyright infringement. Fan material was severely restricted to only a few acceptable places. Quite a few people were hit with C&D letters.

While primarily focused on publishing, the OGL was also supposed to take the fear of that happening again away.

Sure, but we're way beyond those days, frankly, and that's a good thing. The last thing that a gaming company wants to do at this point is start sending out those letters again. The OGL is a great boon for gaming companies, but it's complete overkill for some guy on the Internet. Maybe things will be different in 4E, and I suppose we'll have to see.

What I know is that I'm going to put together a new bard for 4E, and he's going to be awesome. When I'm first releasing it, it's not going to be D20 licensed, OGL or anything ... it's just going to be a fan work by Some Guy on the Internet. Will WotC have a problem with it? I doubt it, I really do!

--Steve

 

[Spinachcat]

We will see.

The RIAA's crusade and the new changes to US laws regarding IP may create restrictions on how much can be posted and where.

Look at D20srd.org - the site uses the OGL without breaking any rules, but it has become the defacto replacement for the PHB, MM, DMG and UA. What began as a publisher resource has become a free version of a paid product that is actually more useful than the paid product.

That kind of website will be curtailed under the new OGL. That style of website will probably see cease-and-desist letters.

However, if you want to showcase your 10 new feats and 2 new monsters on your blog or cheeseball website, then I doubt you have anything to fear.

Thus I have spoken!

 

[smetzger]

Hah, just posted about this very problem in the GR thread.

I do think it will be a problem. When 3e first came out there was a lot of fan created material that was collected and linked from Eric's site. It would seem that any site (other than Gleemax) that attempts to collect and collate this info will be in danger of WOTC sending them a letter from their lawyers.

It is going to be much more difficult and legally risky for another Scott Greene to emerge from the ranks of amateur producers of D&D material.

Scott

 

[sunmaster]

Thank you all for your thoughtful answers.

The setting documents I want to write will be licensed under the Creative Commons Atrribution Non-Commercial Share-a-like license. So you can modify them, copy them and use them as you want. Many of you wrote that if my documents will be fair-use then I don't have to have concerns.
I think with this license they are fair-use and the commercial world stays out

Regarding the SRD : I hope that WotC is going to permit the fans to compile a web-site from the new SRD so that we will get a site like d20srd.org (so long as this site is staying out of the commercial world).

 

[tomBitonti]

... Text omitted ...

Regarding the SRD : I hope that WotC is going to permit the fans to compile a web-site from the new SRD so that we will get a site like d20srd.org (so long as this site is staying out of the commercial world).

But, d20srd.org imposes on the commercial world if it removes an opportunity for WOTC to make money by creating a similar site and charging a fee for it. Or, if it removes an opportunity for WOTC to force you to purchase the core books. What I've heard so far about the licenses is that this is exactly what WOTC is trying to do. The changes to the licenses are telling, where the SRD does not contain the rules material itself, but instead contains references to the rules.

Basically, where I see this going is that to access the rules you must either purchase a core book, or purchase a copy protected PDF of a core book. And, to obtain the full content of the material, you must purchase a subscription to the DDI and pay an additional fee to unlock the added content. I'm seeing that as the core business model, and any sites which interfere with that strategy will be strongly opposed. A site like d20srd.org is completely out of the picture.

The question the business model leaves me is how accessible will the DDI content be. That is:

(*) Will it be a simple collection of HTML pages, with good cross-links and searchability?
(*) Will it be a disconnected collection of strongly copy protected PDFs?
(*) Will it be downloadable?

 

[sunmaster]

@timbitonti :
And this is what I criticize on WotC.

I expected that they learned how to manage a release of a game in an open-source like way.
I expected that they will be more open the next edition.
I expected that they would develop or let develop the next (computer) tools in a more platform-independent way (which is by the way the more actual way of doing developments, platform-dependent is more or like last-century).

Nope, they learned nothing. Going the more closed, more DRM like way of doing (internet) business.

Sad, very sad.

 

[smetzger]

Basically, where I see this going is that to access the rules you must either purchase a core book, or purchase a copy protected PDF of a core book. And, to obtain the full content of the material, you must purchase a subscription to the DDI and pay an additional fee to unlock the added content. I'm seeing that as the core business model, and any sites which interfere with that strategy will be strongly opposed. A site like d20srd.org is completely out of the picture.

The question the business model leaves me is how accessible will the DDI content be. That is:

(*) Will it be a simple collection of HTML pages, with good cross-links and searchability?
(*) Will it be a disconnected collection of strongly copy protected PDFs?
(*) Will it be downloadable?

I think you are correct. Most likely someone could fly under the radar with a small site. But once you get popular or if you are an established company, WOTC lawyers will come knocking. Although I believe fair use would be legal in most cases. It still would not stop them from litigation.

I am also betting the license will have some verbage on electronic playing aids.

Hopefully, the license will be free after the grace period. If its not free I will be sorely tempted to stick with 3.5.

 

[Delta]

I think you are correct. Most likely someone could fly under the radar with a small site. But once you get popular or if you are an established company, WOTC lawyers will come knocking. Although I believe fair use would be legal in most cases. It still would not stop them from litigation.

I agree as well.

 

[Emirikol]

I for one plan to produce a LOT of stuff for my homebrew campaign and put it up here as fan material like I usually do. I'll phone you guys from jail (laugh).

Jay H

 

[Delta]

I for one plan to produce a LOT of stuff for my homebrew campaign and put it up here as fan material like I usually do. I'll phone you guys from jail (laugh).

Of course, it's not a criminal matter (jail), it's a civil matter (fines).