Massive Open Content SRD

[philreed]

Phil, I thought it was very cool that you voluntarily released 101 Divine Spellbooks as a free SRD a while back. There are very few actual data points in the d20 market* to look at when we're talking about the effect of free SRD release, and this is one of 'em. Did you see any noticeable effect on sales of the Spellbooks series, sales of other products, hits to your website, etc. as a result of the free SRD? Would you do it again?

It killed what little sales of that product there were. I didn't see any benefit at all from releasing the product as an SRD.

 

[sjmiller]

It killed what little sales of that product there were. I didn't see any benefit at all from releasing the product as an SRD.

Phil, on a positive note, I bought and use 101 spellbooks, along with a lot of other Ronin Arts stuff. I think I have talked about my LE 101 Unusual Treasures more than any other book I have for gaming. One of these days I will write the war stories about the character skilled in Dwarven Mug Fighting.

Still, it's a shame that it cut into the sale of the product. I like your stuff, and like to see more of it. That is tough to do if you are not making money on them.

 

[barsoomcore]

You want a good example? Adamant's Hot Pursuit.

Am I a good example of doing it right or a good example of doing it wrong?

*sweat stands out on barsoomcore's brow at the thought of Wulf's wrath*

 

[philreed]

Phil, on a positive note, I bought and use 101 spellbooks, along with a lot of other Ronin Arts stuff. I think I have talked about my LE 101 Unusual Treasures more than any other book I have for gaming. One of these days I will write the war stories about the character skilled in Dwarven Mug Fighting.

Still, it's a shame that it cut into the sale of the product. I like your stuff, and like to see more of it. That is tough to do if you are not making money on them.

Overall Ronin Arts is doing very well (after all, we are #2 at RPGNow after Wizards of the Coast -- buy a Ronin Arts PDF today to learn why and help me pay to deal with my recent fire! ) but some experiments succeed better than others.

If someone was to start releasing huge batches of OGC to the web for free it would likely kill Ronin Arts as it currently exists. I'd continue releasing PDFs but any OGL-related products would have very strict OGC declarations and I'd start focusing more on non-D20 products.

I suspect that these frequent cries for free material come from people that don't realize what effect such an effort would have on a lot of publishers.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Am I a good example of doing it right or a good example of doing it wrong?

So sorry that wasn't clear.

Hot Pursuit is a GOOD example of a publisher contacting me beforehand, and getting all the material he wanted and needed to create what I consider "an improvement on the prior art."

I am definitely not hostile to the use of my OGC.

It's sort of like, I don't mind my neighbor borrowing my tools. But whereas before I left them lying out in the yard for my neighbor (or anyone) to come along and take them without asking, now I keep them in my garage.

The garage isn't locked, and the door is open, and you *could* still walk in and take them, but I think folks are more likely to be polite when you demonstrate that you take your ownership seriously.

And at the risk of belaboring this analogy, let's say I have some nice hedge trimmers. I don't mind you borrowing my hedge trimmers and starting your own hedge trimming service. I do mind you borrowing my hedge trimmers if you're selling hedge trimmers.

 

[Conaill]

Hi Wulf - I have to admit that I don't really understand this. Why would it matter to you whether they scan it in or type it out by hand? If anything, the latter seems more likely to introduce mistakes (apart from OCR typos, of course).

The only mistake that counts where the OGL is concerned is in the Section 15 copyright designation. The one time that my work was incorporated by a major publisher, they stripped my name out of the copyright in the Section 15.

Well, I think we can ALL agree that proper attribution has to be given to the originating work! And those publishers who fail to do so should be drawn and quartered - and that's on a good day! However, that is rather besides the point here. In fact, those people advocating an OGC database seem positively eager to acknowledge the original works in a much more visible fashion than just putting in an updated Section 15.

Still doesn't really answer my question though: Why would it matter to you whether they scan it in or type it out by hand?

Or was the point you were trying to make that they would be less likely to screw up Section 15 if they copied your OGC by hand?

Since that time, I've tightened up my OGC designations. If, at the very least, it results in publishers dropping me a line first to ask about the OGC, that's great. It's not required, it's not necessary, but it's appreciated and it certainly makes using my OGC easier, to the point that I will PROVIDE the publisher with the electronic files and make sure that my S15 copyright is clear and correct.

So if someone were to make a free pdf collecting various pieces of OGC, and they contacted you about this, would you provide them with the electronic files, provided the S15 copyright is clear and correct?

I'm guessing the answer is NO, and I would like to hear more on your reasoning behind that.

It sounds to me like you don't really like the open and free use the OGL advocates. Could you say some more about how you feel about this as an author and publisher?

Well, not to put too fine a point on it, that's bullsh*t. I expect I said everything else I needed to say above.

Please don't go accusing me of bullsh*tting. This was an honest question, and I was interested in hearing your opinion on this. At the time I wrote that post, you had contributed *exactly* two whole sentences to this thread, and I wanted to hear more of your point of view.

I realize this seems to be a sore point for you, and perhaps you've already said all of this ad nauseam in other threads. But I for one am definitely *not* clear on where you stand on this issue, from the little you've posted in this thread.

 

[Conaill]

It killed what little sales of that product there were. I didn't see any benefit at all from releasing the product as an SRD.

Thanks Phil. It's great to have at least ONE data point!

It seems like a lot of the poeple wanting to gather a free OGC resource think this could actually be *beneficial* to the publisher, whereas most of the publishers (with some exceptions) seem to think it could only harm them.

If you ever were to do such a free release again, do you see any way you could do it differently so it would actually benefit you as a publisher? What kinds of constraints and safeguards would need to be in place to ensure success?Do you feel we would need a rewritten OGL to make that possible?

Also, how well do you feel your experience extrapolates to print books, which may already be out of print by the time the OGC appears, and provide a whole other level of added value as well?

 

[philreed]

If you ever were to do such a free release again, do you see any way you could do it differently so it would actually benefit you as a publisher?

I don't think there is a way. I've released various free PDFs that have had no effect on sales so I can't see how releasing SRDs of my existing materials would benefit me. It may be different for print publishers but with PDFs it doesn't seem to help.

What I find extremely funny (in a depressing way) is that a lot of people claim the appearance of a product matters to them. If this was true then people would rather buy the original PDF (illustrated by Christopher Shy) rather than download the free RTF. Sales experience has led me to the current method of publishing: most small PDFs have no artwork or frills at all and I save art and graphic talent for the larger releases.

 

[Tav_Behemoth]

Perhaps you should (maybe you do, but I've never seen anyone do this) grant a limited license in your products for use of your product name for this purpose.

Yep, I do - it's even posted earlier in this thread

 

[Vocenoctum]

I personally would download it, mine it for ideas, expose them to other people (perhaps mentioning where they came from if anyone asked), and never buy a product.

True, but what fits in here is would the presence of the SRD cause you to not buy a product you were going to buy?
If you don't buy something you weren't going to buy, it doesn't really harm anything.

I'm saying, publishers releasing some of their OGC in an SRD format, after the useful life of that book containing it has run it's course, would be handy.

I mean, some of the books that have run their course and are OOP, and the company defends the OGC of it on principle? To me that's sillyness. I think the main moral issue of it, is companies that are making money off of WotC's openness with an SRD, then crippling their own content to not add to the circulation.

I want an M&M SRD, because it will make running an M&M game easier for me. I also want a Grim Tales SRD, so if I use that material, I can make it accessible to the players.

The players aren't going to buy a rulebook for either one, regardless of SRD or not. I as the GM need to factor the presence or absence of the SRD into whether I purchase the actual book, because I'm not typing up the rules in entirety for my players.