OGC Wiki?

[Lonely Tylenol]

While I realize this was addressed, I just wanted to come back to the Unearthed Arcana for a moment. It's been out for almost two years, and its just now that the OGC is available on the Hypertext SRD site. Somehow, I don't think that the Hypertext SRD has made much of an impact as to whether or not WOTC produces another OGC book. If they were going to produce one, they likely would have done so before now. Pointing to the Hypertext SRD and saying that they are the cause of no more OGC from WOTC is a little misleading IMO. I don't think there's really a causal relationship there. Not when so much time has passed.

I remember when they were discussing making an online directory of the OGC in Unearthed Arcana, a couple months after it came out. Andy Collins appeared and threw a fit about it, and the consensus among the non-WotC posters was that a 6-month waiting period would be more than enough time for the book to go through its sales lifespan, making it safe to post OGC from the book without eating into anyone's profits. 6 months passed by and no online resource appeared. Only very recently did UA get transcribed and posted.

Maybe the lack of further OGC from WotC has to do with Andy Collins getting worked up about the reception of UA. Maybe not. But I think it's a bit daft to attempt to connect UA's actual dollar value to WotC with the fact that it contains open content. The two are, as far as I can tell, completely unrelated.

 

[philreed]

Only very recently did UA get transcribed and posted.

And the version I just found online -- at www.d20srd.org -- violates the OGL. I keep watching the exact same mistake get made when someone attempts to post all of the OGC from UA online.

EDIT: I have one very simple test that takes me only a few seconds to perform. I've yet to see a free extract of the UA OGC pass the test.

 

[Yair]

And the version I just found online -- at www.d20srd.org -- violates the OGL. I keep watching the exact same mistake get made when someone attempts to post all of the OGC from UA online.

EDIT: I have one very simple test that takes me only a few seconds to perform. I've yet to see a free extract of the UA OGC pass the test.

And would you mind sharing this very simple test with us, or at least with the site's owner so that he wouldn't be breaking the license unintentionally?

To my knowledge, the d20srd.org site maintains the OGL very well. If he made a mistake, that's unfortunate, but respectfully - I can point you towards several publishers that made very big mistakes.

 

[philreed]

And would you mind sharing this very simple test with us, or at least with the site's owner so that he wouldn't be breaking the license unintentionally?

I've shared it many times in the past. The first sentence on this page tells the entire story.

It's actually one of the easiest tests you can run on any collection of the UA OGC. I guess I haven't mentioned it enough times yet.

I can point you towards several publishers that made very big mistakes.

As could I. I've discussed problems with some publishers and there are a few out there that don't care. They'll continue to violate the OGL until someone steps in and legally stop them.

An online OGC collection, designed for use by the entire community, should be held to a high standard. One mistake in such a collection could spread rapidly.

 

[Yair]

I've shared it many times in the past. The first sentence on this page tells the entire story.

So noted.

An online OGC collection, designed for use by the entire community, should be held to a high standard. One mistake in such a collection could spread rapidly.

A wiki OGC collection can be modified by any viewer, and with many eyes reading it and each able to edit it, the probabiity for an OGC violation is decreased.

 

[philreed]

. . . and with many eyes reading it and each able to edit it, the probabiity for an OGC violation is decreased.

I think the chance of violation would be increased. In the OGC setting* thread alone mind flayers were mentioned. We all make mistakes. With many more people involved the chance of mistakes increases and with a lot of content in such a Wiki it would be easy for violations to go unnoticed for extended periods of time.

After all, how long was that particular mistake at the www.d20srd.org site before it was mentioned?

EDIT: * And a quick look at the OGCS Wiki shows that Dark Sun is mentioned.

 

[johnsemlak]

So noted.


A wiki OGC collection can be modified by any viewer, and with many eyes reading it and each able to edit it, the probabiity for an OGC violation is decreased.

I don't think that's something that could be assumed. The numerous mistakes that appear on Wikipedia tell a different story.

 

[SteveC]

I've discussed problems with some publishers and there are a few out there that don't care. They'll continue to violate the OGL until someone steps in and legally stop them.

An online OGC collection, designed for use by the entire community, should be held to a high standard. One mistake in such a collection could spread rapidly.

This is a really interesting point. I actually read the Section 15 for D20/OGL products I buy, and I see problems with it all the time. Beyond that, I've seen many products that take content from other sources out of whole cloth and don't site it at all. Since I don't buy all of the product that's out there (who could) I shudder to think of how many problems there are that I just don't recognize.

This brings up the next question: for a publisher, which is worse, someone posting your content in a wiki, or using it inappropriately in a product and actually making money off of it?

For my part, I believe that an OGL wiki will eventually happen, and that some negative actions of some publishers (not you, Phil) have actually sped this along. When that happens, I expect that it will be held to exactly the same standard as publishers are, which is to say not a particularly high one.

Whether that will be a bane or boon for the gaming industry has yet to be written, I suppose. I suspect that some publishers will adapt and thrive with it, and others won't and they'll be gone...just like always.

--Steve

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

For my part, I believe that an OGL wiki will eventually happen, and that some negative actions of some publishers (not you, Phil) have actually sped this along. When that happens, I expect that it will be held to exactly the same standard as publishers are, which is to say not a particularly high one.

I promise you I will have an easier time finding and acting on violations that appear in a Wiki than I do in umpteen published products.

 

[philreed]

This is a really interesting point. I actually read the Section 15 for D20/OGL products I buy, and I see problems with it all the time. Beyond that, I've seen many products that take content from other sources out of whole cloth and don't site it at all. Since I don't buy all of the product that's out there (who could) I shudder to think of how many problems there are that I just don't recognize.

I know exactly what you mean. Small, accidental mistakes don't really bother me (especially since they can usually be easily corrected). It's the big, blatant "mistakes" -- that are repeated over and over -- that drive me crazy.

But until the community as a whole learns to care about, and punish, those frequent violators (or legal action takes place) there's no incentive for publishers to actually try to get things right.