Paizo Reverses Course, Re-Instates Community Use Policy

Paizo announced on Thursday that they are reversing course on the plan to replace the long-standing Community Use Policy with a new Fan Content Policy. The policy change was announced in July that swapped the two policies around for the use of Paizo intellectual property.

From the blog post:

In July, we terminated Paizo’s longstanding Community Use Policy and replaced it with a new Fan Content Policy. This was an error, and we’re taking steps to rectify that today.

We are reinstating the Community Use Policy as it has existed for over 15 years, with a few minor updates and clarifications intended to make using the policy even easier. We have removed both the Approved Products List and Community Use Registry and clarified some elements that were previously in FAQs or simply not addressed (like being able to use our art and logos in black and white products). We have not changed the permissions granted by the policy. The specific language in the Community Use Policy declaration you need to include in your project has changed to reflect a new URL for the policy on paizo.com, and we have added the provision that you provide contact information somewhere on your product in lieu of the now-removed registry. This change will allow existing Community Use Policy projects to continue to operate as they have for over a decade.

We still fully intend to provide additional permissions for community creators to monetize their creations under limited circumstances. For the time being, the Fan Content Policy allows this, and we’re making no changes to that policy today—it exists alongside the Community Use Policy. With the Community Use Policy restored, we can refine the Fan Content Policy to more clearly define what commercial uses are allowed under what conditions and using which elements of our intellectual property. We will make our intended revisions and updates to the Fan Content Policy and let the community know when the new version is available.

Paizo’s community is the foundation of our success, and we deeply appreciate all of the hard work and passion you bring to our spaces. We apologize for this misstep and look forward to a long, bright future for community projects inspired by our work. Thank you for all of your outreach, feedback, and difficult conversations throughout this process. And above all, thank you for being a part of our community.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

This was related to the Community Use Policy – basically a license saying "As long as the stuff you do is free-ish and reasonably non-offensive, we're not gonna sic lawyers on you for promoting our stuff." That's a bit different from a license that several companies are using to run reasonably profitable businesses.

I mean, it was more than just that. To refresh your recollection-

Paizo - Paizo Updates Pathfinder/Starfinder Licenses

Paizo has announced an update to the third party and fan content licenses for Pathfinder and Starfinder. They are making three major changes: The Pathfinder and Starfinder compatibility licenses are being merged into one Paizo Compatibility License. The compatibility licenses allow a this party...

www.enworld.org

The announcement elided some key details that people immediately noticed, and yes, it did very much affect companies that were trying to run businesses.*

edit- I should add that Paizo, or Hasbro, or any company that reverses course on a bad idea should be praised. Remember- the whole point of pressuring corporations to change course is to get them to change course. Think of all the times that corporations refuse to listen to us. Sure, the original decision was a bad one, but it's better to make a bad decision and listen and change than to not listen at all to what the people that buy your products are telling you.


*I avoid the phrase reasonably profitable when it comes to the TTRPG industry.
What's the best way to make a small fortune in the TTRPG industry?
Start with a large fortune.

 

[Bayushi_seikuro]

Lol. Not what I dislike them for. I like them for saving D&D from being by random house directly and having died a quiet death, but I dislike them for turning the build metagame of D&D up to 11.

The build metagame -- people up-comment were talking about giving the consumers what they want.

There is no D&D meta build war without websites like we're on. You can see it in threads. The books are the books - it's the fans on websites and on Youtube that spend hours making meta builds and optimizing the bejesus out of the game.

 

[Eric V]

It's going to take WOTC years to live down what they tried to do to the OGL and other things they've done just in the last couple of years, if they ever can - which I sincerely doubt. They are very close to that swaggering snarky attitude TSR had back in the day, supposedly safe and secure in being the Big Dog, and believing the Big Dog can do whatever it wants.

Paizo has not done anything remotely close so, yeah, they get a pass for the occasional stumble.

Agreed. Comparing the two is silly.

 

[Sanojo]

It's going to take WOTC years to live down what they tried to do to the OGL and other things they've done just in the last couple of years, if they ever can - which I sincerely doubt. They are very close to that swaggering snarky attitude TSR had back in the day, supposedly safe and secure in being the Big Dog, and believing the Big Dog can do whatever it wants.

Paizo has not done anything remotely close so, yeah, they get a pass for the occasional stumble.

This is way off topic; but talking about TSR, I recently listened to the 'When We Were Wizards' Podcast and, damn, it's a great look into what was going on in TSR back in the day.

 

[bmfrosty]

The build metagame -- people up-comment were talking about giving the consumers what they want.

There is no D&D meta build war without websites like we're on. You can see it in threads. The books are the books - it's the fans on websites and on Youtube that spend hours making meta builds and optimizing the bejesus out of the game.

The build metagame happens when the player can direct the build. The optimization happens when people are able to collaborate. The internet is very good for collaboration.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

This is way off topic; but talking about TSR, I recently listened to the 'When We Were Wizards' Podcast and, damn, it's a great look into what was going on in TSR back in the day.

If you want to talk about it, we have a thread for you! And yes, TSR makes almost all other companies look amazing.

TSR! We put the FUN in dysfunctional!

D&D General - When We Were Wizards: Review of the Completed Podcast!

Four years ago, screenwriter, Adam Turner and Dungeons & Dragons® historian, Paul Stormberg, embarked on a project about Gary Gygax, D&D®, and TSR Hobbies, the company he founded to publish the game. During the course of this project they recorded their ongoing conversations, not only about the...

www.enworld.org

 

[Sanojo]

If you want to talk about it, we have a thread for you! And yes, TSR makes almost all other companies look amazing.

TSR! We put the FUN in dysfunctional!

D&D General - When We Were Wizards: Review of the Completed Podcast!

Four years ago, screenwriter, Adam Turner and Dungeons & Dragons® historian, Paul Stormberg, embarked on a project about Gary Gygax, D&D®, and TSR Hobbies, the company he founded to publish the game. During the course of this project they recorded their ongoing conversations, not only about the...

www.enworld.org

Thanks!

 

[The-Magic-Sword]

I was actually kind of blindsided by the response to this, people were comparing it to the OGL, but I couldn't really find anything particularly egregious-- you usually aren't allowed to make money off other people's IP at all, and it wasn't really going to effect the mechanics any since those products are ORC anyway. It was nothing like what WOTC tried to pull by actually withdrawing the OGL and essentially persona non-grataing entire companies.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

I was actually kind of blindsided by the response to this, people were comparing it to the OGL, but I couldn't really find anything particularly egregious-- you usually aren't allowed to make money off other people's IP at all, and it wasn't really going to effect the mechanics any since those products are ORC anyway. It was nothing like what WOTC tried to pull by actually withdrawing the OGL and essentially persona non-grataing entire companies.

If you back and look at the earlier thread (I posted the link above) you will see that kenada discussed it (with the links) that explained why it was such an issue.

You don't have to agree that it is "the same," but it was certain an issue for people.

 

[The-Magic-Sword]

If you back and look at the earlier thread (I posted the link above) you will see that kenada discussed it (with the links) that explained why it was such an issue.

You don't have to agree that it is "the same," but it was certain an issue for people.

I'm aware, I was providing commentary on that very thing.