Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 4323486" data-attributes="member: 42582">As I explain further below, I think that the answer to this question is "yes, but . . ."As someone (I think Ourph) mentioned upthread, the GSL does not refer to OGC. It tooks about producing, subject to the GSL, a product that has "the same or similar title, product line trademark, or contents" as a product published under the OGL.Clauses 10 and 12 of the GSL require that a publisher who publishes a product under the GSL which contains IP not belonging to that publisher gain the permission of the IP owner to use that IP.So, suppose a publisher wants to convert an OGL product which contained OGC in which that publisher doesn't own the copyright. If the OGC in question was rules text, and the GSL publisher is writing new rules text that fits within the 4e framework, then the question of whether or not that new rules text falls within the original OGC contributor's copyright could be a complicated one, depending in part on the law relating to derivative works. Depending on the answer to that question, the GSL publisher may or may not need to seek the permission of the original OGC contributor.If the OGC was fluff text, then the GSL publisher almost certainly could not reproduce that fluff text verbatim without getting the permission of the original OGC contributer.Of course, you don't need anyone else's permission to convert your own OGC, nor your own PI. You would need WoTC's permission to convert material in a product that was taken from the d20 SRD and which has no analogue in the 4e SRD.As Smetzger said, no issue arises here for KenCo, who are not in breach of any agreement with WoTC.As Clark said, from BobCo's point of view the answer depends (at least in part) on whether or not BobCo and KenCo are affiliates. If so, then BobCo is in breach of clause 6.3 of the GSL. (This is under the assumption that the Hephaflumph published by KenCo counts as "a portion of" BobCo's "Converted OGL Product Line".)As Smetzger said, this depends upon the original agreement between KenCo and BobCo.I would imagine so, as KenCo, in becoming party to the GSL, has agreed that "it will not thereafter manufacture or publish any portion of the Converted OGL Product Line."WoTC are not trying to do what they have no legal power to do, namely, license person A's IP to person B. The rough point of clause 6 of the GSL is to prevent a given publisher (and affiliated publishers) publishing the same content as both an OGL and a GSL product.It does not, and cannot, prevent others who are not party to the GSL from continuing to publish OGC under the OGL.</blockquote>

Verification