New GSL Announcement

[Charwoman Gene]

Nah, I say lets blame Orcus!!!!

I Did.

 

[Jack99]

I Did.

Exactly, but you kind of sucked at it, which is why I am trying to rally support for the cause..

 

[Gilwen]

One thing I would like to point out is that Mayfair Games was found guilty of trademark agreement violations in some of their "AD&D compatible" products, but not all. So, there is precedent for non-licensed "support" products being a violation of trademark rights, which would potentially work against anyone trying something like that today.

Didn't Kenzer Co. originally have unlicensed AD&D compat products and claim compatibility. I don't think they ever go sued, probably grumped at by TSR but I don't think they got sued. I'm not a lawyer so I'm not willing to place my money going that route.

Gil

 

[Jack99]

Go here Link, for questions regarding the GSL.

OGL - Important! Interview opportunity - what do you want to know about the GSL?
We have a unique opportunity for an exclusive interview about the GSL. Morrus and I will select a handful of questions to ask WotC and get answers. Quick, what are the most important things you want to know?

I'll be submitting a list in approximately an hour from this post.

Thanks, everyone.

(just in case you aren't paying attention to the 4e forum atm)

 

[TheRaven]

Boy, I sure doubt that. This isn't TSR we're talking about. The WotC folks I know are smart, knowledgeable about the industry, and aware of past blunders. I wouldn't expect to see any overly restrictive fan site decrees.

If this whole "not on the fence" business is executed as it is discussed in here, then this will certainly restrict fanwork as well. At least in the way of not being able to produce material for both, 3E and 4E. I somehow doubt, that this restriction will only be there for commercial products. And if WotC is truly serious and confident in their DI/Gleemax infrastructure, then it is not a far toss to assume some restrictions enforced on the fans creating D&D material. I'd even consider it a smart move from a business standpoint. Yes, there will be initial uproar but we all know how the internet works and this uproar won't transcend the net. The fans will fall in line.

Wild speculations? Yes indeed but as we await confirmation or dismissal we might as well talk about possible scenarios, can we not?

 

[Piratecat]

Thanks, Jack! Important! We have the chance to get some answers in an exclusive interview about the GSL. Please head here and let me know what you'd like us to ask.

 

[The Little Raven]

Didn't Kenzer Co. originally have unlicensed AD&D compat products and claim compatibility.

They very carefully avoided any direct trademark or copyright issues, so I don't think they claimed capability. Having never seen the original KoK books from the 90s, I couldn't tell you how much of a case TSR could have made.

 

[InkwellIdeas]

One thing I would like to point out is that Mayfair Games was found guilty of trademark agreement violations in some of their "AD&D compatible" products, but not all. So, there is precedent for non-licensed "support" products being a violation of trademark rights, which would potentially work against anyone trying something like that today.

I've gotta believe it was the particular phrasing. There's just too much "borrowing" then putting an extra spin that happens in the industry (Heck, almost any industry) for it to be impossible to borrow/be compatible with rules and careful phrasing will let the consumer know. As someone else pointed out there's got to be other examples. The Mayfair incident is cited above. But even outside the industry, what about generic drugs, off-brand replacement ink, generic garage door openers, universal remote controls? All of these things denote they are compatible or have the same active ingredients, etc., as the other product and they have to use the original products specs (ingredients and amounts for drugs, dimensions of printer cartridges, signals and frequencies for remotes) in the creation of the new product.

 

[deadDMwalking]

We have invested multiple 7 figures in the development of 4e so can you tell me why we would want publishers to support a system that we have moved away from?

The thing for me is that you're taking a wonderful game, and making it something 'less wonderful'. From the moment that the end of Dragon and Dungeon in print were announced, I knew that I was done with WotC. I was a little sad about it. I sent a lot of letters regarding it (and I got the same form letter back when I received acknowledgement at all). So, I can't really say I'm a WotC customer. I WAS, but that was some time ago. I kind of think it's too bad, because I'm the 'decider' for our group. If I go 4th ed, we go 4th ed. Since I'm going Pathfinder, we're going Pathfinder.

This is not spite, malice or some evil scorched earth policy. Yes, we want people to make 4e books and stop making 3.x. Does that surprise you?

No, but your choice seems to be another poor one. If you want people to support 4th edition, it seems you would want to make the choice to support 4th edition as enticing as possible. As 'Orcus' says, there aren't a lot of companies that could have supported both. Now many of those companies may support 3.5 instead, because 4th edition doesn't seem like a 'good option'. If nothing else, it takes a lot of faith to commit to a game that hasn't proved its success yet.

Heh. You got us on that one. We don't intend to alter the either/or nature of the GSL. I mean, if we open up that point again for internal debate it'll take another six months to get everyone in agreement on the best approach.

We understand the impacts this license will have on the 3pps, fans, community and industry in general. We respect that companies will need to make the decision that is right for them and their supporters.

We totally believe in 4E. We're not doing any edition but 4E. We are so thoroughly behind it we are giving it 100% of our support. That says something.

I think it is too bad that there are obviously a lot of people at WotC who I agree with, but they were 'overruled'. Perhaps they really were convinced that this was for the best. Honestly, I don't really care what you as a company do with 4th edition. As I was saying above, you've done enough to lose me without regard to the new rule set (Dragon and Dungeon were huge, but there's more). I remain skeptical that a failure of 4th edition isn't in everybody (other than WotC and Hasbro's) best interest. But I do think that if 4th edition were truly open and companies like Paizo had been included completely and fully, I might have considered switching to 4th edition 3 years from now, or so. Now, that's an option that I don't have to consider, and I fully expect that there will be more 3.5 material released in 2011 than there was in 2008. I think I'm looking at a good time for myself as a gamer.

I don't mean to be hurling any personal insults, but the thing that still surprises me is how a company that has done so much good for gaming and garnered so much good will could throw it away so quickly? The reason I haven't purchased anything from WotC in the last year is the 'my way or the highway approach' that I see you taking. I just submitted orders totalling over $900 for gaming materials TODAY. I have another order for $100+ at Paizo waiting to submit until they allow me to combine orders with my subscriptions. The $800+ includes the World's Largest Dungeon, every Sword & Sorcery Module my local Game Store never seemed to have (there were a lot, apparently), a couple books I had missed from the Freeport series, a couple of other Green Ronin books, and some Historical books by Avalanche Press (I've enjoyed them so far). The thing is, I used to spend 20x+ what I spent on 3rd party publishers on WotC products.

I guess you might say that I'm exactly the kind of customer that Open Gaming was for. I bought a lot of WotC stuff, and I did so in large part because of the support of other companies. Without Dragon and Dungeon by Paizo, and some of the earlier Sword & Sorcery titles, I wouldn't have switched to 3.5. I was impressed that the production values increased from 3.0 to 3.5, but it wasn't enough to encourage me to switch by itself.

What surprises me most, though, is that I still feel upset about all of this. Sure, supporting WotC remains a choice I COULD make, but I feel that the choice is not in my best interest as a consumer. So, whether 4th edition is a success or a flop for you, I hope that you as a company realize that there are still gamers out there that COULD be won back, but it's going to take a major change in the perception of how you as a company engage your COMMUNITY at large, including other publishers and your customer base.

 

[mxyzplk]

I agree it should be corrected. I was the source of the comment, and I am 100% certain that is what I was told. There is no doubt about it. But we have not gotten an official statement about it. And, as with many things regarding the GSL, it appears to be in flux. As I have said, I hope that my question was either misunderstood or their answer was misunderstood by me.

In any event, this is hardly the thing that should get slashdotted as an actual fact. It is still pending resolution in my mind. I call on mxyzplk to make an appropriate retraction or notation.

Clark

So technically I'm banned from the thread but there's no other good way to reply to this and it's kinda important to, so here goes.

I only found out I got slashdotted an hour ago myself, so I'm just getting on top of this (day job, you know.) Sure, if we learn more/different from WotC in this upcoming interview or later, I will immediately update my blog and alter/retract any necessary statements, make a new post, whatever. I'm not interested in slandering WotC, I'm interested in the truth getting out, and that truth ideally being that WotC's being nice. I'd much rather have only happy things to report.

Now I bow out of the thread again, hope that wasn't seen as naughty, ENWorld admins.