Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="masdog" data-source="post: 8899451" data-attributes="member: 7039919">I think it comes down to trust. The 3PPs are using a license that one of the other publishers has created. That publisher also made a set of promises around that license to get others to adopt and trust it. Now the originator (and the only party authorized to release an updated version of the license) has decided that this license scheme no longer fits their business model and is trying to kill it.Regardless of how this would shake out legally, continuing to trust that license would be a significant business risk. Especially if the originator attempts to use their dominant market position to make it hard to sell products with that license attached.So by creating a new license scheme and giving the management to a 3rd-party organization (as stated in the press release), they effectively remove a risk to their business model and community.Except Paizo wont own the ORC license, and they wont be able to update it unilaterally. Their stated intentions are to follow the open-source software world where a 3rd party non-profit will manage the license itself. Paizo will still have a say in future revisions of the license, but they wont have sole control of it.This has happened before in the Open Source world. The Free Software Foundation created the GPLv3 to prevent others from using GPL-licensed software in ways they didn’t like (mainly TiVo, even though they were within their rights under GPLv2). As I recall, they strongly encouraged all GPLv2 projects to adopt the new license. A number of larger open source projects licensed under GPLv2, including the Linux kernel, told them to go pound sand.of course they could. But it’s harder to do when they release things under a license they don’t unilaterally control.</blockquote>

Verification