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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Setanta" data-source="post: 1492898" data-attributes="member: 2183">Sure, but the intent was that that redistribution be done by other sources who are using previous OGC in a published work, so that not every company is reinventing the wheel with every product.We're getting away from the original complaint here. I'm sure if we asked Andy Collins, he'd say he'd be happy to see UA's OGC in other publishers work. That's clearly in the spirit of the OGL. What is not in the spirit of the OGL is people transcribing whole works so that others can use that work for free.  I would not defend a company that does that; making it difficult to tell what is OGC and what is not OGC is not only against the spirit of the OGL, it's against the letter. That's not the point though. Neither that company, nor one that clearly designates OGC, wants their hard work to be given away for free. Some people do- I gather you're going to post your Aedon bestiary for anyone's use, and that's great. However, if a company is in business to make money selling D20 stuff, I can understand them not wanting people to give away their hard work for free. And no need to rehash the fact that they entered into the OGL, blah blah blah. If they perceive that people copying and posting whole books hurts their business, then I'm sure many publishers would consider releasing less OGC, or crippling OGC as best they can. Some wouldn't, sure, but some would, and that's bad for us, the consumers.  Apparently I didn't expand on this enough. Someone who says "but 5 mph over the speed limit is safe and thus within the spirit of the speed limit laws, thus it's unfair to get a ticket" is setting a double standard by saying "it doesn't matter if the spirit of the OGL was not to let me get stuff for free- the letter of the OGL says I can have it for free." That's my whole point. If someone follows the letter of the law in all instances, great. However, I'm not quite that Lawful- I tend to look at the intent (or spirit) of the law or agreement, and I try to live up to that. So I complain if I get a speeding ticket when I'm driving safely, but I would never consider transcribing a whole book and giving it away just because the OGL says I can. I'm only making a point about the double standard here- not trying to say it's OK to speed and not OK to transcribe UA.  I imagine lots. However, WotC made the choice to make their work available for free on the Internet, presumably after a suitable waiting period that saw their sales slow. Have you noticed that they don't add stuff to the SRD until it's been out on shelves for a while? UA is probably still selling fairly well. Doesn't WotC deserve a chance to make a little money on it before people give it away for free? I think the idea of a waiting period for free and open distribution of OGC is pretty reasonable, but UA just came out recently.  You knew what I meant. Let's not get all pedantic. What if they make the non-OGC portions of their work more viable by just making less of their work OGC? If publishers are loathe to release OGC because they think it will hurt their sales when it's copied and given away for free, then they'll probably just release less OGC. That's basically my point. Yes, it's perfectly OK for people to copy UA and post it on the Internet for all to download for free. However, does that hurt WotC? Will it inevitably hurt us, the consumers, as WotC and other publishers choose to release less OGC because of this kind of action? If so, should it be done?  I don't see any publishers complaining about the OGL. Clearly, any that have benefitted from it by releasing D20 stuff would be crazy to complain. What I have seen is publishers asking fans and other publishers to give them a chance to make a bit of money before giving away their work for free. Publishers typically ask each for permission before using each others OGC, even though they certainly don't have to. And, in the few occasions where I've heard of a publisher asking another not to use their OGC, the other publisher has complied with the wishes of the first. It's common courtesy, nothing more, and nothing less. You have to remember that we here at EN World are a very small minority. Most D&D players don't give a rip about OGC/OGL. If WotC puts out 4E after a reasonable amount of time and it looks like an improvement, they'll buy it. And because they'll buy it, even if it's not open, I would expect many current D20 publishers to end up entering into licensing agreements with WotC to produce stuff for 4E, and the world would go on, with the OGL gradually fading into obscurity.</blockquote>

Verification