GSL FAQ up

[HeinorNY]

Let's not get into semantical debate over the term 'fantasy', please. There's enough of that clogging up the internet. Its clearly implied what they're doing here.

I agree.
Just say the name of the game and we will give our opinions if it should be released under D&D GSL or d20 GSL.

 

[Lizard]

I agree.
Just say the name of the game and we will give our opinions if it should be released under D&D GSL or d20 GSL.

Your opinion isn't legally binding.

"I know it when I see it" has no place in contract law.

 

[Irda Ranger]

I agree.
Just say the name of the game and we will give our opinions if it should be released under D&D GSL or d20 GSL.

Would that be a legal opinion? In writing?

 

[HeinorNY]

Your opinion isn't legally binding.

"I know it when I see it" has no place in contract law.

I think it will fall on the 3PP's decision.
If some 3PP wants to release Spycraft under D&D GSL, it's up to them. But they will have to refer the rules to the D&D core book, so it might not be a good idea.
I don't see why WOTC would oppose to that, they wanna sell books.


Maybe some obvious games like Spycraft must be released under the D20 GSL. Products that fall in the middle ground, those which people could argue that it's a modern and fantasy game, are up to the 3PP's decision.

I can't see an issue here.

 

[mhacdebhandia]

I wonder if Paizo will be forced to destroy any back issues they might still have. Were those magazines d20? They most certainly were not OGL. Perhaps something entirely different?

You want to pick door number three.

Paizo's publication of Dragon and Dungeon was arranged under a completely separate license from either the d20 System Trademark License or the Open Game License. It was more of an actual contract between Wizards of the Coast and Paizo Publishing.

As I understand it, Paizo actually has (or, at least, had at some point) all of Wizards of the Coast's backstock of physical Dragon and Dungeon issues, including those that date from the TSR era, long before the d20 STL, the OGL, or even Third Edition itself. They may have had to return those to Wizards of the Coast when their license to publish the magazines was terminated, but perhaps not.

 

[drothgery]

I suspect WotC will not try to define non-fantasy. Instead they will create a definition of "D&D related Fantasy" which are based on the core tropes of D&D. However, that won't be easy either.

I'm going to guess that what we'll end up is
D&D 4e GSL - supplements to D&D (campaign settings, classes, races, specialized rulesets, adventures, etc.)
d20 GSL - standalone games and supplements to any new semi-open d20 games (presumably starting with a revised d20 Modern)

 

[Mouseferatu]

Apropos of nothing, am I the only one who thinks "Gslfaq" (or something comparable) sounds like the name of a member of a primitive goblin tribe?

 

[jedrious]

Apropos of nothing, am I the only one who thinks "Gslfaq" (or something comparable) sounds like the name of a member of a primitive goblin tribe?

side effect of an acronym-happy society

 

[lkj]

Q. Why are there two different licenses?
A. The D&D 4e GSL is specific to the Dungeons & Dragons brand. The d20 GSL allows for non-fantasy genres. Both licenses tie to the 4th edition rule set.


What exactly does this mean?

Does this help?:

Q. Does the so-called "poison pill" non-compete clause apply to ALL OGL, or only D&D-based fantasy? (i.e. what if it's based on d20 Modern, d20 Future, or a non-d20 source?)

A. It’s not a “poison pill.” It’s a conversion clause. The D&D 4E GSL applies to fantasy-based products. The d20 GSL, which will come out at an undetermined point in the near future, will be for non-fantasy genres such as Modern, Future, etc. Publishers will be able to decide on a product line by product line basis which license will work best for them.

 

[Yair]

I am disappointed that Wizards didn't answer the key question for fan sites, especially as it took the questions from ENWorld:

8) How does the new licensing policy affect fan created works? What is WotC's current policy on such works?

Of course, their interest lies with aiding the publishers right now - but I would have thought fan sites would be on their mind as well.

At any rate, this is fast looking to be the best license for 3rd-party publishers yet. The poison-pill ain't too bad at all, and the freedom to make use of Wizards' IP seems much more promising than with the OGL (the SRD would be far easier to update, for one).

For myself, since it is revocable it is totally unacceptable so I'll probably be moving away from 4e in a year or so.