Goodman is clearly going to the GSL.

[Jack99]

So, have Goodman and WotC publicly just refused to comment on what's going on?

Goodman has, saying that he doesn't comment on business on public messageboards, WotC has simply ignored any questions.

 

[Agamon]

Goodman has, saying that he doesn't comment on business on public messageboards, WotC has simply ignored any questions.

And honestly, I don't understand why anyone thinks they should comment publicly about business decisions.

 

[catsclaw227]

Anyways, Joe G. saying he will forever cease selling 3E PDF's is pretty solid proof that he will be going the GSL. The D20 STL certainly wouldn't stop him. He would delete the logo's from his PDF's and keep on selling them.

I am not a publisher, nor am I a lawyer, but I believe it was stated somewhere that taking a product out of the D20 STL is a lot more than just removing the logo. Aren't there potentially a bunch of edits that would need to be done to the book?

 

[Psion]

I am not a publisher, nor am I a lawyer, but I believe it was stated somewhere that taking a product out of the D20 STL is a lot more than just removing the logo. Aren't there potentially a bunch of edits that would need to be done to the book?

Well, I would think so, but Scott Rouse seemed to imply it would be as simple as deleting the D&D text line and blacking out the d20 logo.

Which still, could be a hassle if your layout situation is less than optimal.

 

[Jack99]

And honestly, I don't understand why anyone thinks they should comment publicly about business decisions.

In principle, I agree. Just in this case, as it is affecting my decision to pre-order the adventures, it would be nice (for me) to know. But I guess, if we hear nothing, that I will just cancel my preorder and wait for the jungle drums of ENworld to inform me how they are made.

 

[Corjay]

Well, I would think so, but Scott Rouse seemed to imply it would be as simple as deleting the D&D text line and blacking out the d20 logo.

Which still, could be a hassle if your layout situation is less than optimal.

If the license requires the logo and the name, then blacking them out will nullify the license and any privileges granted by it.

 

[Henry]

Well, I would think so, but Scott Rouse seemed to imply it would be as simple as deleting the D&D text line and blacking out the d20 logo.

Which still, could be a hassle if your layout situation is less than optimal.

Not a lawyer of course, but based on what I know of the STL and the OGL, in most cases it IS as simple as that. Since one still has to comply to the OGL before complying to the STL, and the STL is more restrictive, then dropping those layout elements means you're still automatically complying with the OGL.

 

[Vocenoctum]

And honestly, I don't understand why anyone thinks they should comment publicly about business decisions.

He's doesn't have to comment, obviously, but it's not that huge of a market. If the answer will be obvious as soon as someone picks up a product ("hey, there's no GSL here") then there's no real reason NOT to.

Anyway, was just curious.

 

[Brown Jenkin]

I seriously doubt that. IF this is true its about the only area of law where this would be true. I'm pretty sure all laws have a "drop dead date". I forget the correct terminology right now. Oh yeah, "Statute of Limitations".

Murder doesn't have such a limitation, but I am pretty sure copyright violations would.

Edit: Yep, I am right. The statute is 3 years.

That 3 year statute of limitations would apply to damages of a particular violation not to the copyright itself. The copyright itself is valid for life of the author+75 years or 95 years for corporate owned copyrights. The copyright can be ignored for 50 years and no recourse for past violations would apply for anything older than 3 years but the copyright would still be valid. After 50 years the owner could then decide that anything for 3 years ago and into the future would be fully enforced and he would be legally entitled to do so. Not enforcing the copyright does not make it public domain.

 

[jaerdaph]

Not a lawyer of course, but based on what I know of the STL and the OGL, in most cases it IS as simple as that. Since one still has to comply to the OGL before complying to the STL, and the STL is more restrictive, then dropping those layout elements means you're still automatically complying with the OGL.

In addition to the logo, you had to include legal text within the product ("Dungeons & Dragons is a trademark of WotC yada yada yada" or some such), and had to have the phrase "Requires the use of the Dungeons & Dragons Player's Handbook published by Wizards of the Coast" or some such. The d20 license also allowed you to reference section headings of the core rulebooks by name within the text of the product. All of that would have to be removed from the product as well.
Again, it's not always just a simple matter of deleting/covering up a logo for print or PDF products.