Licensing, OGL and Getting D&D Compatible Publishers Involved

[GravyFingerz]

Rules however can be part of a trade dress lawsuit, and indirectly copyright as look and feel. That was decided with the Tetris case just last year. "The look and feel of [a game] is copyrightable expression distinguishable from the ideas of the game".

Bloody common law.

 

[Wicht]

Didn't Goodman publish for 4e without using the GSL. I don't remember them getting sued, so I am not convinced the danger of litigation is as great as some might think it is.

 

[darjr]

What Goodman games did clearly wasn't infringing because wotc would have been required to go after them or give up certain rights, right? Could wotc have just ignored it and still gone after others?

 

[Wicht]

What Goodman games did clearly wasn't infringing because wotc would have been required to go after them or give up certain rights, right? Could wotc have just ignored it and still gone after others?

Well sure, but to hear some people describe it, any sort of thing that gets close to even suggesting compatibility is ripe for a suit. While we do not know what discussions went on inside WotC in relation to Goodman eschewing the GSL and following the old Judges Guild route, obviously if they did consider it they decided it was not worth pursuing, which does indicate some measure of leeway in publishing compatible material.

 

[Nellisir]

The open market is already here and thriving and I do not believe that a closed market can compete with what I think is clearly a superior model for the consumer over the long haul. Namebrand only gets you so far.

Does anyone know if Numenera is open in any way? I have never gotten the impression that Monte was in favor of the OGL or a fan of its use.

 

[Morrus]

Does anyone know if Numenera is open in any way? I have never gotten the impression that Monte was in favor of the OGL or a fan of its use.

He's always been a major fan of its use - he used it extensively for 80-odd products under his Malhavoc Press banner.

 

[Gundark]

Peole keep saying that the OGL benefits Pathfinder.I am skeptical that the OGL or their PRD (or whatever it is called) significantly benefits Pathfinder all that much. Note that I am NOT saying that there is zero benefit to the OGL. However their success comes from producing high quality adventure paths, not from a third party publisher putting out "Bob's guide to magic carpets" and that this is somehow keeping people buying Pathfinder.

 

[darjr]

Peole keep saying that the OGL benefits Pathfinder.I am skeptical that the OGL or their PRD (or whatever it is called) significantly benefits Pathfinder all that much. Note that I am NOT saying that there is zero benefit to the OGL. However their success comes from producing high quality adventure paths, not from a third party publisher putting out "Bob's guide to magic carpets" and that this is somehow keeping people buying Pathfinder.

I agree, they are successful because they put out high quality products that their customers want. In my mind part of that equation IS releasing under OGL. Bigger for some rather than others.

 

[Nellisir]

He's always been a major fan of its use - he used it extensively for 80-odd products under his Malhavoc Press banner.

"Was required" to use it would seem more accurate. He locked down anything that could be locked down, and the declaration of OGC that applied whatever had to be OGC was almost always some variation of "if it's OGC elsewhere, then it is here, and if it's not, it isn't", so in order to determine what was OGC and what wasn't, you needed to consult each of the sources listed in the license. I don't consider someone who routinely locks down spell names, monster names, and class names as particularly OGC friendly. On a spectrum, I'd say he was among the least open with his content of the major 3rd-party publishers, if not the least open.

Spell templates, for instance - the concept was open, but the spell templates published in Arcana Unearthed/Evolved were all closed in their entirety. I emailed him about this, and he clarified that was the intent. We could write our own (which had to be open), but not use his.

Mind you, I am NOT saying he did not have the right to do so.

Anyways, Numenera?

 

[Morrus]

Well, the answer to your question is "no". Numenera is not open, but it does have a recently published community use policy.