OGC Wiki?

[Khuxan]

Hi,

I was wondering if anyone has considered making a Wiki for OGC - both published and otherwise.

...

That seem's like an awfully short post, but that's all there is to it, I think :\

 

[jdrakeh]

Mike Mearls proposed this a while back and it was discussed at length before being abandoned for two primary reasons:

1. A large number of publishers, despite releasing content as OGC, vocally opposed people collecting that content and making it available to the public in one, convenient, place (no, I am not exaggerating). In other words, a lot of publishers didn't really have their hearts in the right place when it came to releasing OGC, apparently (i.e., they were cool with calling it OGC, but aren't too hot about people actually using it in that capacity).

2. Several people (myself included) noted that making sure the wiki content OGL was up to date (i.e., contained an all-inclusive Section 15 and Copyright section) would effectively be a full time job. Somebody would have to check the wiki and (likely) update its attached copy of the OGL to reflect submitted content on a daily basis. Doing so would be a colossal PITA.

I liked the idea. In fact, having recently toyed with the idea of running an entirely OGC campaign, I really liked the idea - but in the end, I agreed that it would ruffle a lot of the wrong feathers and be very hard to maintain where license issues are concerned.

 

[Yair]

Similar ideas were raised in the past, but pretty much all amounted to nothing for basically the same reasons jdrakeh detailed. These include a massive collection of OGC in a mega-SRD, a secretive site to collect and relsease OGC for publishers only, a combined project to extract OGC from various (or all) sources, and so on.

 

[Odhanan]

OGC wiki

So the short answer would be: it is possible, but nobody has the balls or the time to do it because it would require a lot of investments on the parts of its investigators.

Now... who dares? Please dare.

 

[Yair]

So the short answer would be: it is possible, but nobody has the balls or the time to do it because it would require a lot of investments on the parts of its investigators.

Now... who dares? Please dare.

You talk the talk, but can you walk the walk?

It isn't a matter of "balls", necessarily. There is the issue of having to possibly face legal action, yes. But for the most part I think the deterrant is the time and effort loss, and not wanting to hurt people who say they will be hurt.

I wonder if it would be possible to arrange for a Chinese server. I believe their protection of copyrights is not very stringent, to put it mildly. (But I could be confusing thigns with patent laws.)

 

[Khuxan]

Thanks for the feedback. My tentative idea was that every piece of OGC would have to be tagged "This material is believed to be Open Game Content by the individual submitting it. Until such a claim has been verified, this content should not be treated as Open Game Content". Then someone else would have to come along and verify it was Open Content before it would be officially 'Open Content'

For example, a procedure:
"1. Check to make sure what you're adding is, in fact, Open Game Content.
2. Post the Open Game Content where you see fit
3. Add a note to the Open Game Content saying "This material is believed to be Open Game Content by the individual submitting it. Until such a claim has been verified, this content should not be treated as Open Game Content"
4. Add the copyright notice (Section 15 of the Open Game License included with the product) to the site's Open Game License"

I'm not sure, but I don't think publishers are as protective of their OGC as they used to be. For example, my 2001 copy of the Book of Beasts (Eden Publishing) is really stingy with their OC... and my 2005(?) copy of Tome of Horrors II is really generous with OC, and all that's happened to them is they got a bit of free advertising with the Screaming Skull PnM. No one made a cheap version of ToHII so they could capitalise on Greene's hard work, because ultimately it's easier to churn out your old stuff.

 

[philreed]

Let me ask this.

Why do you want an OGC Wiki?

 

[philreed]

I'm not sure, but I don't think publishers are as protective of their OGC as they used to be. For example, my 2001 copy of the Book of Beasts (Eden Publishing) is really stingy with their OC... and my 2005(?) copy of Tome of Horrors II is really generous with OC, and all that's happened to them is they got a bit of free advertising with the Screaming Skull PnM. No one made a cheap version of ToHII so they could capitalise on Greene's hard work, because ultimately it's easier to churn out your old stuff.

It depends on the publisher. Time of release has almost nothing to do with it.

 

[Yair]

Thanks for the feedback. My tentative idea was that every piece of OGC would have to be tagged "This material is believed to be Open Game Content by the individual submitting it. Until such a claim has been verified, this content should not be treated as Open Game Content". Then someone else would have to come along and verify it was Open Content before it would be officially 'Open Content'

For example, a procedure:
"1. Check to make sure what you're adding is, in fact, Open Game Content.
2. Post the Open Game Content where you see fit
3. Add a note to the Open Game Content saying "This material is believed to be Open Game Content by the individual submitting it. Until such a claim has been verified, this content should not be treated as Open Game Content"
4. Add the copyright notice (Section 15 of the Open Game License included with the product) to the site's Open Game License"

You can't publish any copyrighted work on a wiki or anywhere else. If you don't release the material as OGC using the owner's permission under the OGL, you can't release it at all.

Releasing it as OGC with Section 15 and all but then adding "it should not be treated as OGC" just adds confusion, you are still releasing it as OGC and are simply recommending others not trust you. This is IMO worse than simply releasing it as OGC and saying on your frontpage that all efforts are made to ensure content is pure OGC, but the user beware.

 

[philreed]

You can't publish any copyrighted work on a wiki or anywhere else. If you don't release the material as OGC using the owner's permission under the OGL, you can't release it at all.

Exactly. Posting material with wishy-washy, weak disclaimers of "I think this is legal!" provides no protection from lawsuits. If the person running such a site is not 100% certain that the material is OGC then why is it even being posted?