GSL FAQ up

[Shades of Green]

Past behaviour is a good indication of future behaviours as far as individuals are concerned, but not necessarily so with organizations, esp when there is a turnover of individuals within the organization. I wouldn't apply TSR's actions to possible WotC actions. We're different folks, with different motivations in a new environment. The most harassing you'll see from me is an occassional frowny face in a forum. And even those are few and far between

Thanks for the reassurance. You've just made my day and removed my greatest fear about 4E

 

[hexgrid]

Urban Arcana is both modern and fantasy.

This is beside the point. The point is that the D&D 4E GSL only allows for products to be published specificity as D&D supplements. Because this wouldn't be appropriate for all genres (or non-fantasy, as the interview puts it) there will be another license.

There's no need to decide what fantasy means, you just need to decide wether the product makes sense as a supplement for D&D. If it does, you use the D&D 4E GSL, if it doesn't you use the d20 GSL.

That's how I interpret it, at least.

 

[Oldtimer]

Past behaviour is a good indication of future behaviours as far as individuals are concerned, but not necessarily so with organizations, esp when there is a turnover of individuals within the organization.

And that's exactly the point some of us are trying to make. And why the OGL was such a reassurance. And the GSL not.

The most harassing you'll see from me is an occassional frowny face in a forum. And even those are few and far between

But what if you aren't Licensing Manager for life, Linae? Like you said, with a turnover of individuals could come new behaviour...

 

[ruemere]

Umm... excuse me, but what is the cause for celebration?

1. GSL is a revocable. Meaning, among other things, that it is changeable.

2. GSL is revocable, so any products released under this license have timer attached. Meaning: your investments may be in real and reasonable danger of being liquidated by license onwer (there is no OGL for 4E products to escape to).

Regards,
Ruemere

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Umm... excuse me, but what is the cause for celebration?

1. GSL is a revocable. Meaning, among other things, that it is changeable.

2. GSL is revocable, so any products released under this license have timer attached. Meaning: your investments may be in real and reasonable danger of being liquidated by license onwer (there is no OGL for 4E products to escape to).

Regards,
Ruemere

That didn't stop the d20 System License either. (What stopped it was that it didn't provide any value for customer or publisher, since the logo didn't stand for high quality or compatibility with D&D, as it was implied to do...)

 

[The Little Raven]

Umm... excuse me, but what is the cause for celebration?

Because you get the benefit of the world's largest roleplaying game company's R&D department doing the vast majority of the heavy lifting involved in game design, which a publisher can benefit from free of charge. You get to use the biggest name in the industry for free, and enjoy the benefits of network externalities that come with said name.

 

[Ximenes088]

Umm... excuse me, but what is the cause for celebration?

1. GSL is a revocable. Meaning, among other things, that it is changeable.

2. GSL is revocable, so any products released under this license have timer attached. Meaning: your investments may be in real and reasonable danger of being liquidated by license onwer (there is no OGL for 4E products to escape to).

Yeah, that looks to be the case. That's what you get when you hitch your wagon to somebody else's star. If you're looking for some sort of license that gives you perpetual rights to leverage the market leader's product to sell your own, with no way for that leader to curtail or end such leverage, then you're out of luck. WotC hasn't got any reason to guarantee 3PP an iron dice bag. Their motivation is to give 3PP a chance to expand their market coverage by providing niche products that can't profitably be undertaken by them. When 4e goes under in a decade or so, 3PP are just going to have to either trust that WotC will give them an escape hatch into 5e or be ready to homebrew their own system.

And I don't really see anything wrong with that. Anything WotC gives is morally and legally pure charity. They've got no special obligation to loan their IP out for someone else to sell on, and this new contract makes clear up-front that it exists at WotC's pleasure. If you think it's a good deal, you take it, and if you don't, you keep with OGL.

 

[Nom]

This is beside the point. The point is that the D&D 4E GSL only allows for products to be published specificity as D&D supplements. Because this wouldn't be appropriate for all genres (or non-fantasy, as the interview puts it) there will be another license.

Yep, that's the critical point. The OGL allowed 3PP to make games. The GSL allows 3PP to make supplements (and badge them as such, like the STL). Presumably, the d20 GSL will allow 3PP to make supplements for the non-D&D d20 rules, once those rules are published.

 

[mxyzplk]

Umm... excuse me, but what is the cause for celebration?

Well, the celebration is that WotC isn't trying to drive open gaming out of the market. You're right, it's sad that they are no longer participating in it.

The GSL is in no way open, but they don't claim it is. It's no more or less than any other company does with closed licensing agreements.

So no, this clarification didn't move then from closed to open - but it did move them from probably-illegal definitely-hateful anticompetitive activity in their closed license to a normal closed license, which is definitely something. Yes, they could change it to be more draconian any day, but hopefully inertia will rule.

 

[The Little Raven]

So no, this clarification didn't move then from closed to open - but it did move them from probably-illegal definitely-hateful anticompetitive activity in their closed license to a normal closed license, which is definitely something. Yes, they could change it to be more draconian any day, but hopefully inertia will rule.

This "probably-illegal definitely-hateful anticompetitive activity" was simply a product of your (and other's) misinterpretation of the information they released. As Linae has already stated that the document is exactly the same as it was weeks ago when this brouhaha started, nothing on their end has actually changed.