Heh. Good point. I should try to keep that in mind.
Goodman is clearly going to the GSL.
- Thread starter Treebore
- Start date
Heh. Good point. I should try to keep that in mind.
Psion
Adventurer
Ayup. There are some pretty clear implications to the GSL. It remains to be seen how successful WotC's salted earth/poison pill provision will be, but given the negative reaction to it, I was hopeful that the impact would be fairly minimal. The ability to get something I want for D20 3.5, in electronic format, without having to chase it down on ebay or used bookstores, whenever I decide I might need if for my game, is a great boon to me.
thundershot
Adventurer
Treebore
First Post
Your right, it shouldn't matter, but as it is there is a huge majority that won't buy anything for D&D unless it says "WOTC" on it. Then there are some who will buy stuff that is "D20 OGL" compatible.
For me I don't care if it says "Official 4E GSL stuff" on it. I would prefer it stays 3E OGL, but it isn't critical for me.
So I wish your "ideal world" did exist, and that people did only care about how well written it is, etc... Unfortunately the reality is that if it doesn't say "WOTC D&D" on it the products are ignored by many. If it says "D&D compatible" a few more people pay attention to it and maybe buy it.
If you say "Usable with the worlds most poplar fantasy game" even fewer will buy it.
Now the D&D "market" will be experiencing its biggest division yet. This is the first time ever that the "old edition" will continue to be supported by a good sized publisher. This will be the first time ever, due to PDF's, that it may be financially advantageous to companies like yours and Goodman to keep product available to the 3E market AND move forward with 4E. The GSL takes away that possibility.
So it is important, and as a publisher I am surprised you aren't aware of that.
HeapThaumaturgist
First Post
Some small minority of the community are so incensed by the GSL as to specifically NOT buy GSL-supported product and would be MORE interested in purchasing non-GSL D&D-compatible products.
--fje
--fje
Wulf Ratbane
Adventurer
I guarantee GMS knows this. He's a sharp guy. Which puts his comment more in the context of sharp-shooting that particular demographic as opposed to "Please, educate me."
thundershot
Adventurer
Oh, hey, I just realized who GMS is... I preordered your Rat-Men book a few days ago, man. Can't wait to use it as my first 4E adventure! 
I am curious though, as to how much page flipping through the MM I'm gonna need to do....
Chris
I am curious though, as to how much page flipping through the MM I'm gonna need to do....
Chris
ANNND one MORE time:
"6.1 OGL Product Conversion. If Licensee has entered into the “Open Gaming License version 1.0” with Wizards (“OGL”), and Licensee has previously published a product under the OGL (each an “OGL Product”), Licensee may publish a Licensed Product subject to this License that features the same or similar title, product line trademark, or contents as such OGL Product (each such OGL Product, a “Converted OGL Product”, and each such Licensed Product, a “Conversion”). Upon the first publication date of a Conversion, Licensee will cease all manufacturing and publication of the corresponding Converted OGL Product and all other OGL Products which are part of the same product line as the Converted OGL Product, as reasonably determined by Wizards (“Converted OGL Product Line”). Licensee explicitly agrees that it will not thereafter manufacture or publish any portion of the Converted OGL Product Line, or any products that would be considered part of a Converted OGL Product Line (as reasonably determined by Wizards) pursuant to the OGL. Licensee may continue to distribute and sell-off all remaining physical inventory of a Converted OGL Product Line after the corresponding Conversion is published, but will, as of such date, cease all publication, distribution and sale (and ensure that third party affiliates of Licensee cease their publication, distribution and sale) of any element of a Converted OGL Product Line in any electronic downloadable format. For the avoidance of doubt, (a) any OGL Product that is not part of a Converted OGL Product Line may continue to be manufactured, published, sold and distributed pursuant to the OGL; and (b) this Section 6.1 will survive termination of this Agreement."
Under section 1, "Effective Date," it says: "Notwithstanding the foregoing, except as otherwise provided in this License no Licensed Product (as defined below) will have a first on-sale date prior to October 1, 2008."
That line clearly states that there is at least one point in this license that changes the October date. And that line is the one I highlighted in red.
Now I tried to apply the phrase that I bolded in 6.1 to Wizards determining what part of the previous OGL gets discontinued, but it just doesn't make sense. You either discontinue it or you don't. Therefore, this may be interpreted as saying that the timeframe decided must be passed by WOTC, especially since it's all a part of the same line. So the only stipulation would be WOTC's approval. Also, typically, an important date such as the October 1st date would be clearly redefined at this point in any normal contract if it wasn't changed, further highlighting the ambiguity. Also note, that the section I highlighted in red was AFTER the "subject to this license" line and is itself a part of this license. So therefore bolding "subject to this license" is simply circular, as what I highlighted IS part of the license and they are therefore subject to it. And the bolded part of section 1 clearly shows that the date can be changed by said license.
"6.1 OGL Product Conversion. If Licensee has entered into the “Open Gaming License version 1.0” with Wizards (“OGL”), and Licensee has previously published a product under the OGL (each an “OGL Product”), Licensee may publish a Licensed Product subject to this License that features the same or similar title, product line trademark, or contents as such OGL Product (each such OGL Product, a “Converted OGL Product”, and each such Licensed Product, a “Conversion”). Upon the first publication date of a Conversion, Licensee will cease all manufacturing and publication of the corresponding Converted OGL Product and all other OGL Products which are part of the same product line as the Converted OGL Product, as reasonably determined by Wizards (“Converted OGL Product Line”). Licensee explicitly agrees that it will not thereafter manufacture or publish any portion of the Converted OGL Product Line, or any products that would be considered part of a Converted OGL Product Line (as reasonably determined by Wizards) pursuant to the OGL. Licensee may continue to distribute and sell-off all remaining physical inventory of a Converted OGL Product Line after the corresponding Conversion is published, but will, as of such date, cease all publication, distribution and sale (and ensure that third party affiliates of Licensee cease their publication, distribution and sale) of any element of a Converted OGL Product Line in any electronic downloadable format. For the avoidance of doubt, (a) any OGL Product that is not part of a Converted OGL Product Line may continue to be manufactured, published, sold and distributed pursuant to the OGL; and (b) this Section 6.1 will survive termination of this Agreement."
Under section 1, "Effective Date," it says: "Notwithstanding the foregoing, except as otherwise provided in this License no Licensed Product (as defined below) will have a first on-sale date prior to October 1, 2008."
That line clearly states that there is at least one point in this license that changes the October date. And that line is the one I highlighted in red.
Now I tried to apply the phrase that I bolded in 6.1 to Wizards determining what part of the previous OGL gets discontinued, but it just doesn't make sense. You either discontinue it or you don't. Therefore, this may be interpreted as saying that the timeframe decided must be passed by WOTC, especially since it's all a part of the same line. So the only stipulation would be WOTC's approval. Also, typically, an important date such as the October 1st date would be clearly redefined at this point in any normal contract if it wasn't changed, further highlighting the ambiguity. Also note, that the section I highlighted in red was AFTER the "subject to this license" line and is itself a part of this license. So therefore bolding "subject to this license" is simply circular, as what I highlighted IS part of the license and they are therefore subject to it. And the bolded part of section 1 clearly shows that the date can be changed by said license.
Last edited:
As a 3E gamer, that entirely depends on whether Goodman can sell 3E-compatible products. And hmmm.... it just so happens to be a particular license that determines whether he can or not.
Crothian
First Post
As a 3e gamer I'm pretty happy with the 50+ modules Goodman has already produced. I'll be happy with what ever happens and I'm in the don't care camp on if they are using the GSL
Similar Threads
- Locked
