Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
GSL FAQ up
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="phloog" data-source="post: 4204119" data-attributes="member: 59219"><p>I wish I could share your feelings. </p><p></p><p>For me the concern stems from the facts that:</p><p></p><p>1) there WERE interpretation issues within WOTC, and</p><p>2) the document apparently did NOT change a bit in the recent weeks, and</p><p>3) the document is revocable, and</p><p>4) WOTC is clearly trying to move away from Open (insert your definition here) gaming</p><p></p><p>My concern is that with so many fingers in the pie, there is technically NOTHING preventing WOTC from issuing a GSL1.1 that provides further 'clarity', and immediately revokes the current GSL. The 1.1 version would be so close as to allow them to pitch it as no big deal, but further restricting companies in any way they chose.</p><p></p><p>Someone at WOTC, likely MANY someones, wanted it to be company-by-company...others read it differently. Clark talked to one of the company-level contingent.</p><p></p><p>The uproar on the web caused the 'product line' interpretation to win out, but apparently the document can be read to be either company-level or product level.</p><p></p><p>That's frightening. </p><p></p><p>Luckily, since their FAQ says one thing, they will likely never be able to successfully argue for company-level in court under the CURRENT GSL, but it's apparently the most trivial move in the world to add a line 'clarifying' the restrictions as company-level. </p><p></p><p>As soon as some threshold number of gamers start using 4E, they can drop in the poison pill.</p><p></p><p>I'm not saying they're evil or anything, but if I was a publisher I'd be extremely worried about jumping in on this. "Here's the new GSL, the old one is dead...but of course you can continue to publish your popular GSL products, if only you would just drop all support for OGL stuff" </p><p></p><p>They appear to be trying a lot of new business models based on established successed (micro-transactions for miniatures, Insider as a stream of consumer 'touchpoints', a monthly revenue stream through DDI)...this is great in some ways, but I think it implies that your six-years-out optimism may be unfounded - - if they continue to adapt new models from existing businesses, a six-year update cadence is a bit 'old school'</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="phloog, post: 4204119, member: 59219"] I wish I could share your feelings. For me the concern stems from the facts that: 1) there WERE interpretation issues within WOTC, and 2) the document apparently did NOT change a bit in the recent weeks, and 3) the document is revocable, and 4) WOTC is clearly trying to move away from Open (insert your definition here) gaming My concern is that with so many fingers in the pie, there is technically NOTHING preventing WOTC from issuing a GSL1.1 that provides further 'clarity', and immediately revokes the current GSL. The 1.1 version would be so close as to allow them to pitch it as no big deal, but further restricting companies in any way they chose. Someone at WOTC, likely MANY someones, wanted it to be company-by-company...others read it differently. Clark talked to one of the company-level contingent. The uproar on the web caused the 'product line' interpretation to win out, but apparently the document can be read to be either company-level or product level. That's frightening. Luckily, since their FAQ says one thing, they will likely never be able to successfully argue for company-level in court under the CURRENT GSL, but it's apparently the most trivial move in the world to add a line 'clarifying' the restrictions as company-level. As soon as some threshold number of gamers start using 4E, they can drop in the poison pill. I'm not saying they're evil or anything, but if I was a publisher I'd be extremely worried about jumping in on this. "Here's the new GSL, the old one is dead...but of course you can continue to publish your popular GSL products, if only you would just drop all support for OGL stuff" They appear to be trying a lot of new business models based on established successed (micro-transactions for miniatures, Insider as a stream of consumer 'touchpoints', a monthly revenue stream through DDI)...this is great in some ways, but I think it implies that your six-years-out optimism may be unfounded - - if they continue to adapt new models from existing businesses, a six-year update cadence is a bit 'old school' [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
GSL FAQ up
Top