OGC and the Consumer

[Bendris Noulg]

In a recent discussion on a mailing list, the idea of including OGC considerations in product reviews was discussed. I thought it was a decent idea, although perhaps not necessary.

Recently, however, I chance upon a product that had an OGC/PI Declaration that really irked me. In short, it indicated that the product was 100% OGC, but then proceeded to PI all Feats, Powers, Prestige Classes, Items, and numerous other items that are customarily Open Content. In short, nothing was Open Content. This wasn't just a "names are off-limits" statement or "don't copy our text verbatum" statement; It was a statement that made all material in the book Closed Content after indicating that new Open Content was actually in the product.

I've discussed the item with the author, who has proven most draconian concerning Open Content (as well as ignorant concerning the OGL). While I tried to be open-minded concerning his explaination, nothing about it seemed to "gel right" in regards to my knowledge of the OGL.

So I've gained a bit of curiosity in the matter: How relavent is it to the average gamer (as opposed to publishers that would value OGC specifically more than anything else) that a product properly indicate what materials within are OGC? Does the proper identification of game mechanics as Open Content at all effect your opinion and purchase of a product?

 

[gamecat]

It being ogl is a good thing, Jerrid.

 

[EarthsShadow]

How long has that product been out, I am curious?

As for a product needing to be OGC or needing anything to be OGC in order to be purchased, who cares really. As long as you like the product that's all that matters. I hope this reply goes along with the ideas present in the topic, but if I am off in my thoughts then let me know.

 

[Mark CMG]

In short, it indicated that the product was 100% OGC, but then proceeded to PI all Feats, Powers, Prestige Classes, Items, and numerous other items that are customarily Open Content. In short, nothing was Open Content. This wasn't just a "names are off-limits" statement or "don't copy our text verbatum" statement; It was a statement that made all material in the book Closed Content after indicating that new Open Content was actually in the product.

Either you are mistaken as to what they meant, or they are simply wrong. Mechanics such as that are impossible to close because they are by default derivative of the same type of machanics from the SRD. I suspect they meant to explain that they were keeping the names as PI, which may also be difficult if such names are similarly derivative, I.E. Punishing Cleave, Super-Duper Alertness, Craft (shoe tying), etc.

 

[Bendris Noulg]

Re: Re: OGC and the Consumer

Either you are mistaken as to what they meant, or they are simply wrong.

I hoped they had been mistaken in their OGC/PI Statement, which is why I asked the author in the first place. The response wasn't very uplifting.

For clarity, though:

...Declaration of Open Content: 100% of this Product is Open Content subject to the Product Identity listed here: [Company Name], [Product Name], Psionic Gifts, all new feats, all new powers, all new items, all new prestige classes, all new organizations, [Subrace of] Elves. License to use these items can be acquired privately...



I've eliminated items that would identify them (at least to people not familiar with the company already, which I suspect are few), but this is pasted directly from one of their pdfs.

 

[Mark CMG]

Re: Re: Re: OGC and the Consumer

...Declaration of Open Content: 100% of this Product is Open Content subject to the Product Identity listed here: [Company Name], [Product Name], Psionic Gifts, all new feats, all new powers, all new items, all new prestige classes, all new organizations, [Subrace of] Elves. License to use these items can be acquired privately...

Seems impossible to me that they can believe they can claim such things are not derivative (and thereby OGC by default). That exact text should be shared on the OGF lists so that it can be cleared up before someone further down the chain makes the mistakes that this person/company has. It serves no purpose to keep it secret if someone is in violation, but it likely does little good to debate it here where very few of the people who will be effected (by perhaps reusing such a declaration) will be aware of the error. Thanks for bringing it to light. It behooves everyone in the community to bring such things to the fore whenever they are encountered.

 

[The Sigil]

Re: Re: Re: Re: OGC and the Consumer

Seems impossible to me that they can believe they can claim such things are not derivative (and thereby OGC by default). That exact text should be shared on the OGF lists so that it can be cleared up before someone further down the chain makes the mistakes that this person/company has. It serves no purpose to keep it secret if someone is in violation, but it likely does little good to debate it here where very few of the people who will be effected (by perhaps reusing such a declaration) will be aware of the error. Thanks for bringing it to light. It behooves everyone in the community to bring such things to the fore whenever they are encountered.

What Mark said.

Also, Bendris, would you be so kind as to e-mail me off-thread to let me know what product this is?

Posted by Earthsshadow
As for a product needing to be OGC or needing anything to be OGC in order to be purchased, who cares really. As long as you like the product that's all that matters. I hope this reply goes along with the ideas present in the topic, but if I am off in my thoughts then let me know.

To everyone out there who says, "it doesn't matter," it certainly does matter - even to the casual fan. If you want to put up some of the stuff from the books you've purchased on your website, even just to share with your friends, you are at the mercy of the kindness of the author - if he wants to shut your website down for copyright infringement, he can (not saying that someone WILL, but there is that liability). As a consumer, if you educate yourself RE: the OGL and abide by it when posting to your website, the site becomes "untouchable." Also, you can share your adventures, et al, freely over the net without worry of problems.

I would suggest that authors that are as stingy as possible with their OGC, and who don't really understand the OGL in their designations are the ones MOST likely to come "crashing through your virtual door" with a C&D order.

Yes, the OGL was created for publishers, but it also works to protect fan sites... no more draconian C&D letters CAN be sent to you if you do it right... and IIRC, this was also (a small) part of the reason for the OGL - to let you know what you can & can't post on the internet without getting sued and what are the "rules of the game."

As a fan, I want to know what I can and can't copy, re-use, distribute to my players, post on the web, and so forth - without getting in legal hot water. THAT's a very good reason to educate yourself RE the OGL.

--The Sigil

 

[Bendris Noulg]

Mark CMG:

The product in question had been discussed on the OGL List prior to my joining; I checked the archives for it, so decided not to mention it there as a dead horse issue.

This thread isn't really intended to debate the subject, however; I'm just kind of curious how the average gamer views the OGC content of their purchases. I run a fan site that uses, modifies, coverts old material as, and produces new OGC, so, to me, Open Content is important. From the mail list, I understand how Publishers value Open Content, being as much (if not more) than myself.

But the thought did occur to me, which is the subject of the poll: What influence does Open Content quantity have on gamers that can use material, PI, and anything else they feel like without any ramifications? Is it ever a consideration? How many never thought about it until I specifically asked? Now that I've asked, will it be a consideration in the future? While the average gamer isn't effected by OGC by law (as fan projects and published works are), how many are effected by the "spirit" of the OGL as a matter of choice?

 

[Quinn]

For me, it has very little impact, however I am not trying to do any conversions nor do I intend to come out with my own product. I know there are more than a few gamers who do want to do this.

That said, my purchases do not run outside of companies using OGL. If a company was not using d20, I probably wouldn't buy it. Not exactly sure why this is...mainly I like the thought that the designers are trying to build something along a core set of rules so I don't have to do a terrible lot of modifications in order to make the rules work with my game. Doesn't always pan out that way even with products put out under d20 but oh, well...

 

[Buttercup]

As a fan and a purchaser OGC and the OGL are important for several reasons.

First, as Sigil said, if I want to put up a campaign website, I want to know that I'm not goint to get a C&D letter.

But I also think it's important because of the tone it sets. The OGL has created a unique and friendly community of writers, publishers and consumers. It allows a wonderful creative synergy to exist and build. To bite the hand that feeds one, by not giving back as much as one gets, is indicative of an attitude that I don't want to support with my money.