[Gleemax]Another thing not to like.

[Storm Raven]

Yes, but that does limit the community's power where it doesn't need to be limited, and it still means that WotC is kind of taking advantage of the fans in this light, milking them for their creative juices without giving back to them. Smart, definitely.

No, it doesn't limit the community's power at all. It creates the kind of community that apparently WotC wants. That's just not the rules for the community that you want. Which is fine. But it is their sandbox, and if you want to play, play by their rules. If you don't like the rules, just don't play.

Really, the concerns you raise (people who might post things on Gleemax, but don't because they want to keep the IP away from WotC) likely only apply to an incredibly small proportion of the people likely to post to Gleemax in the first place. If the ToS you are complaining about deters more than 0.01% of the potential posts on Gleemax, I'd be surprised.

 

[Storm Raven]

I guess it all boils down to how they define "content". If it is left undefined, then no sane publisher with a IP or trademark of their own would participate on the site. Not at the risk of WOTC then being able to lay claim to a royalty free, open ended, use as they will license to use that "content" (copyright or trademark).

But that's not how the ToS is phrased - it is worded in a way that makes this a non-viable option for WotC.

 

[Scribble]

If anything I think ENworld should be up in arms... Gleemax is sort of encroaching on their turf...

 

[Brown Jenkin]

No, it doesn't limit the community's power at all. It creates the kind of community that apparently WotC wants. That's just not the rules for the community that you want. Which is fine. But it is their sandbox, and if you want to play, play by their rules. If you don't like the rules, just don't play.

Really, the concerns you raise (people who might post things on Gleemax, but don't because they want to keep the IP away from WotC) likely only apply to an incredibly small proportion of the people likely to post to Gleemax in the first place. If the ToS you are complaining about deters more than 0.01% of the potential posts on Gleemax, I'd be surprised.

Sure, the ToS will only apply to a small fraction of people posting. Unfortunately the small fraction it does effect are all the other game companies that are needed to make this a site for all gamers and games and not just WotC gamers and games. Without this small fraction there is no real difference between Gleemax and WotC.com

 

[Scott_Rouse]

I guess it all boils down to how they define "content". If it is left undefined, then no sane publisher with a IP or trademark of their own would participate on the site. Not at the risk of WOTC then being able to lay claim to a royalty free, open ended, use as they will license to use that "content" (copyright or trademark).

The copyright issue is not too big really, since other publishers could express their ideas in one manner and express them differently in print. The "ideas" themselves can't be protected anyway, short of an idea being worthy of a patent.

If, however, by "content" WOTC also intends to claim trademarks also fall under their TOS and their right to license, then its a deal breaker. No publisher would ever participate on the site.

I guess time will tell if WOTC decides they want Gleemax to be a WOTC fan site or a broader industry site. How they construct their terms of service with respect to other publishers' IPs will plan an important roll in which they get, regardless of intent.

It's not as if Gleemax and the TOS are your little brother who licks all the cookies so they are now "his". None of this can override IP law. Trademark holders rights can not be usurped by some web sites TOS

 

[I'm A Banana]

No, it doesn't limit the community's power at all. It creates the kind of community that apparently WotC wants. That's just not the rules for the community that you want. Which is fine. But it is their sandbox, and if you want to play, play by their rules. If you don't like the rules, just don't play.

Really, the concerns you raise (people who might post things on Gleemax, but don't because they want to keep the IP away from WotC) likely only apply to an incredibly small proportion of the people likely to post to Gleemax in the first place. If the ToS you are complaining about deters more than 0.01% of the potential posts on Gleemax, I'd be surprised.

I don't dispute any of this.

But I'm well within my rights to vocally complain about why I won't contribute, which can include the idea of, as Scott put it...

Gleemax and the TOS are your little brother who licks all the cookies so they are now "his".

 

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

It's not as if Gleemax and the TOS are your little brother who licks all the cookies so they are now "his". None of this can override IP law. Trademark holders rights can not be usurped by some web sites TOS

I just love this analogy.

Oh, and wanted to mention that I love your avatar, Scott.

 

[Storm Raven]

Sure, the ToS will only apply to a small fraction of people posting. Unfortunately the small fraction it does effect are all the other game companies that are needed to make this a site for all gamers and games and not just WotC gamers and games.

To tell the truth, I'd guess that WotC really could not care less about whether other game companies post material on Gleemax. They aren't selling to other game companies after all.

 

[Yair]

It's not as if Gleemax and the TOS are your little brother who licks all the cookies so they are now "his". None of this can override IP law. Trademark holders rights can not be usurped by some web sites TOS

I... want to say "Yes, they can", but I'll bow before your wisdom. [Aren't agreements a way "around" trademark/copyright exclusivity? And isn't clicking "I Agree" on the TOS legally a binding agreement?]

WotC has been very good about respecting others' IP and their fans. If it intends to pay for the content it uses, however, I suggest not writing things like "if you post (for example) an awesome Magic card or a D&D feat that we think is cool, we're allowed to put it into one of our books, card sets, etc." - not like that. Similarly, the post didn't clarify third parties' IP will be protected from being used in this manner if they post it on Gleemax. Frankly, I think the post was just phrased poorly, or not thought out. I have faith in WotC, and believe it will behave honorably and reward and acknowledge contributers, and will not use Gleemax as a means to obtain access to others' IP.

What killed the d20 license, IMO, was too much product and too little quality control. The license ended up having almost no marketing value. There was nothing special about d20, because everything was d20.

That was part of it, yes. But the same or more could be said about the "OGL" term, yet Mongoose published "OGL" books. The d20STL also has imitations - Green Ronin published "True20" proudly, Mongoose promises one for their Traveller line... There was going to be a downturn at d20 System products anyway, but part of the reason many newer products weren't using the d20STL (even though they probably could) was that it was just safer legally. The publishers realized that their d20 System products were at at the mercy of WotC's arbitrary whim. Sure, they knew it in principle before-hand. But there is a difference between knowing about it abstractly and actually seeing WotC change the terms to include moral clauses and shut down a publisher. They needed to isolate themselves from such dangers - hence, their own propriety trademarks, and not using the d20STL.

 

[Vocenoctum]

Edit: Another Comment-
What killed d20 System licensing, IMO, was WotC's change of license. At least, it was a dominant factor. Companies saw WotC could change the license from under them specifically to undermine their products. It wasn't likely, but it was possible, and they didn't want to put themselves in that position. Developing an OGL line was seen as superior.

I really doubt it. Some felt slighted by the change to 3.5, but mostly it was due to the over abundance of d20 crap and the sinking sales to distributors because of that. Heck, the way most D20 companies managed the 3.5 changeover (quite badly, with products that were half converted) probably drove off as many buyers as anything.

Make no mistake, if D20 sales were still there, folks would be doing D20, regardless of the D20 License.

WotC's "ever changing terms of use" will do the same. No company will agree to post things to a place where it constantly needs to look at the terms of use, and WotC can change them to whatever on their whim. Too dangerous. WotC really hasn't learned from the Valterra debacle.

It's worth noting not only that the BoEF was the main focus, but also that the change did not prevent the BoEF from being published anyway.

A better way to look at it is the change from the "gentleman's SRD" to the Real SRD. WotC didn't punish folks for it, and illithid books were released after they were removed. WotC is about protecting themselves, not attacking others, and it generally shows in their handling of matters.