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: 9639301" data-attributes="member: 8461">If you use open material to create derivative material, said derivative material should itself be open; one fish being able to choose not to do that is not a good reason why everyone else should be able to.I'm not sure what you mean by "carve-outs," but if they're in violation of the OGL then that's on them. Of course, from what I've seen, that's a very, very small number of products from an even smaller number of publishers, so you can feel very confident in that number.That depends on what you mean by "negative." It's still producing open content that other publishers can use, which is good, but letting them keep derivative material close despite being made from open material means that it's not as good as the OGL is.No, that's not the comparison. The comparison is you citing all the books that were not made specifically because publishers didn't want all of their derivative material being Open Game Content, which is an unfalsifiable claim.Of course it's about third-party publishers; that's what this entire conversation is about. I said before that it doesn't matter what you do in your home game, because issues of who owns what intellectual property has no impact there.An open license which produces less open content is providing less material for third-party publishers to avail themselves of, and so isn't as good as a license that results in more open content being produced. That's conducive to more content, though the issue of how many products are made is going to be tied into wider economic concerns, and so isn't the best metric.Except the ORC License doesn't let you use what would otherwise be open material from Pathfinder/Starfinder Infinite.</blockquote>

Verification