Proper location for discussions re: New License

[tomBitonti]

From the sticky:

The Open Gaming Foundation believes that a license must provide for two important features in order to be an Open Game license.

1. The license must allow game rules and materials that use game rules to be freely copied, modified and distributed.
2. The license must ensure that material distributed using the license cannot have those permissions restricted in the future.

Does the new license satisfy these constraints? Would it be proper to create a new section for the new license that removes "O" from the title? While use of the new license impacts use of the prior license, they seem to be very different agreements and (I think) should not be considered in any meaningful was as a continuation or adaptation of the prior license.

Also, there are related threads both in this "OGF-L" forum and in other forums, and these seem to deserve to be together.

(The only way that I'm able to wrap my head around the new license is to forget about the old license and to create a whole new understanding of the license. IMO: I very much do not see that the "mode" imposed by the new license is close to the "mode" imposed by the old license. The licenses may have a similar "meta" goal which is promote the D&D brand, but the way that they get there is very different.)

Thx!

 

[Oldtimer]

From the sticky:



Does the new license satisfy these constraints? Would it be proper to create a new section for the new license that removes "O" from the title? While use of the new license impacts use of the prior license, they seem to be very different agreements and (I think) should not be considered in any meaningful was as a continuation or adaptation of the prior license.

Also, there are related threads both in this "OGF-L" forum and in other forums, and these seem to deserve to be together.

(The only way that I'm able to wrap my head around the new license is to forget about the old license and to create a whole new understanding of the license. IMO: I very much do not see that the "mode" imposed by the new license is close to the "mode" imposed by the old license. The licenses may have a similar "meta" goal which is promote the D&D brand, but the way that they get there is very different.)

Thx!

I second the motion to move all GSL threads out of OGF-L. The GSL is not an Open Gaming License, so it should not be discussed here.

 

[Morrus]

I'll add "GSL" to the description of the forum.

 

[LordKruge]

I think that the GSL is probably better off in its own forum as well. It carries with it a whole host of legal issues that aren't present with the OGL and basically you're going to have both groups of 3pp OGL and GSL coming to one forum.

Maybe that's good, I don't know, but considering how different the two are, separate forums seem warranted.

If you wanted to combine forums, maybe combining GSL with the D20 board would be better. The GSL essentially replaces the old D20 license anyway, doesn't it?

 

[JohnRTroy]

Outside of the "excitement" from the OGL/GSL controversy, when does this forum actually SEE any traffic. That's not meant to be snarky, if you read this forum, the only threads of merit in the past 6 months have been the debates about Wizards and the OGL.

This forum was meant to replace the OGL mailing list, but a lot of people from that list never migrated here. Considering how many people ignore this forum altogether, I'd vote to move all OGL/GSL discussion to "General".

 

[Morrus]

Outside of the "excitement" from the OGL/GSL controversy, when does this forum actually SEE any traffic. That's not meant to be snarky, if you read this forum, the only threads of merit in the past 6 months have been the debates about Wizards and the OGL.

This forum was meant to replace the OGL mailing list, but a lot of people from that list never migrated here. Considering how many people ignore this forum altogether, I'd vote to move all OGL/GSL discussion to "General".

General is crowded enough already. A better solution, which solves both problems, is to move those threads here.

 

[Oldtimer]

I'll add "GSL" to the description of the forum.

Now that title really doesn't make any sense at all.

Why not let GSL kill OGF-d20-L and take it's stuff?

 

[tomBitonti]

I'll add "GSL" to the description of the forum.

Hi,

Wow! Thanks for the quick response!

I was wondering, though, if there could be a more "top" level forum for the new GSL? For a while, at least, the GSL will generate a lot of traffic, and I don't think folks know to go to this forum instead of to the 4E or general forum.

Or, perhaps, a sticky link to this forum, or a note on one of the banner pages?

Thx!

 

[JohnRTroy]

OGF/4eGSL-L doesn't really make sense as a forum name. (OGF-L was to replace a listserver).

Why not just call it "Gaming Licenses" or "Licensing and Legal". That makes much more sense now. I'm sure other companies might create another license.

 

[jmucchiello]

Add categories to the forum so there's general, ogc and gsl.