NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Alzrius" data-source="post: 9639096" data-attributes="member: 8461">I disagree with you here; that helps the people at the bottom of the food chain more than anyone, because it gives them a variety of open content that's not only massive, but ever-expanding. Literally, each new release is that much more for the community to freely use, alter, and remix in ways that the original creator(s) might not have foreseen, and we're all the beneficiaries of that. The community is the real winner.Yes, it was unfortunate that WotC was able to subsequently release D&D 3.5 products which were not Open Game Content. But making it so that downstream publishers could themselves elect not to release SRD-derived material as OGC (which is the state of things under the CC-BY-4.0) only means that they could emulate the very behavior that you're decrying here. Far better to mandate that all derivative OGC be itself OGC.I think you mean "virality" there, unless there's a subtext of which I'm unaware. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":P" title="Stick out tongue    :P"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":P" />And if the CC SA does require the publisher to release everything, derivative material and original material alike, then that's too far in the other direction. There's no happy medium where derivative material must be shared but original material can be without having to be.Largely because most everyone who was qualified to say so agreed that claim was bunk. It was based on a threat with no real chance of being followed up on. I've said before that shady legal threats which won't hold up in court aren't particular to any license; anyone can threaten to sue anyone for anything at any time; while I understand why publishers find even that too much to countenance, it's still a shame that such bogus threats are able to alter the course of an entire industry.See above. That "better" license doesn't mandate the same level of openness where derivative content is concerned, and so won't create the same rich environment that we've enjoyed under the OGL.Which begs the question of just how much of your derivative content do you make open? Because unless the answer is "all of it," then you're giving downstream publishers less than the OGL would mandate, meaning that they lose out because of your actions.Now, I hope you don't do that, so I'll ask you to make a public pledge right now: will you release all derivative content that you make as open under the CC-BY-4.0?</blockquote>

Verification