Goodman is clearly going to the GSL.

[Psion]

As a 3e gamer I'm pretty happy with the 50+ modules Goodman has already produced.

Do you own them all? I don't. As I understand the GSL, if he makes a 4e DCC series, he can no longer sell 3e DCC pdfs.

 

[Crothian]

Do you own them all? I don't. As I understand the GSL, if he makes a 4e DCC series, he can no longer sell 3e DCC pdfs.

I'm missing two. Even if Goodman can't sell them, the secondary market is still there and I doubt many of them will see a price increase for being oop.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Do you own them all? I don't. As I understand the GSL, if he makes a 4e DCC series, he can no longer sell 3e DCC pdfs.

Only if he makes 4e DCC under the terms of the GSL. Otherwise, whilst they'd be annoying WotC, there would be no legal impediment.

 

[Treebore]

I'm missing two. Even if Goodman can't sell them, the secondary market is still there and I doubt many of them will see a price increase for being oop.

You may want to check out eBay prices. You'll likely have better luck with Noble Knights, etc... for a little while. I'm not worried about buying any more, myself. I already have the ones I like. Which is about 28 of them. Plus I hate having PDF only.

 

[Treebore]

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.

OK, that makes much more sense. I was under the impression all the pertinent parts were in section 6.1.

I'm looking forward to GenCon just to see if those Goodman DCC's are under the GSL. Your points strongly show they certainly can be, and therefore likely are.

I for one don't plan on buying much of anything that is 4E. The only reason I am looking at any DCC's is because of the one with the Fat Dragon stuff in it. Which I believe is DCC 54.

 

[Treebore]

Only if he makes 4e DCC under the terms of the GSL. Otherwise, whilst they'd be annoying WotC, there would be no legal impediment.

Plus Joe has posted in the last day or two that he still thinks he will be able to support the 3E RPG base. As to what that means we still have to wait and see, because Joe even indicated he doesn't know how yet.

 

[Piratecat]

Fail.

Be polite, folks.

 

[Crothian]

You may want to check out eBay prices. You'll likely have better luck with Noble Knights, etc... for a little while. I'm not worried about buying any more, myself. I already have the ones I like. Which is about 28 of them. Plus I hate having PDF only.

I haven't looked at all of them on ebay for the past few months as I've been finishing up the collection I have been using e-bay and I rarely have paid more the half cover price. And that includes many of the older ones. Now, I don't doubt some of the special printings of limited Gen Con releases are very expensive.

Looking at completed sales on ebay the only one I'd say that is out of whack is the free game day thing Goodman just put out. I can't believe someone would pay over 40 bucks for it. I wasn't that impressed with it.

 

[Treebore]

I haven't looked at all of them on ebay for the past few months as I've been finishing up the collection I have been using e-bay and I rarely have paid more the half cover price. And that includes many of the older ones. Now, I don't doubt some of the special printings of limited Gen Con releases are very expensive.

Looking at completed sales on ebay the only one I'd say that is out of whack is the free game day thing Goodman just put out. I can't believe someone would pay over 40 bucks for it. I wasn't that impressed with it.

Yeah, if your slow and careful you can get good prices, just don't wait too long if you really want all of them.

I noticed that Free RPG day thing. The Paizo one sold for $20+shipping despite Paizo selling it themselves for $5.00+shipping.

 

[Psion]

Only if he makes 4e DCC under the terms of the GSL.

Which was the context we were speaking in. "Why should we care if they use the GSL":

I'm in the don't care camp on if they are using the GSL