Question about OGL

[jaerdaph]

It's like you're coming into my room to bathe me. Though you have perfect intention, you do not have permission to touch me in the first place.

 

[tenkar]

Ranger REG - That is not an image I want to conjure up before breakfast... or any other time for that matter... I think I'll just leave you dirty

 

[SteveC]

Well, you're not supposed to that without permission, and the most likely answer you'll receive from WotC and/or Lucasfilm is "no."

You COULD get WotC's permission to reference the VP/WP system from Unearthed Arcana.

I know you have the best of intention (i.e., promoting a product), but you don't do it without securing their permission.

It's like you're coming into my room to bathe me. Though you have perfect intention, you do not have permission to touch me in the first place.

Let me be the second to say, well, ewww, to your analogy. You're right, though, WotC would just say "no" if I asked to put that sentence in my product.

To me it seems silly to make the only place you're going to reference the source for your open content be section 15 of the license. If you look at that section, you can see that a reader has almost no way to know exactly what you used, which is really too bad. When I look at a product that uses the OGL, I immediately turn to the license and see if they've used material that I'm familiar with from other sources. The fact that you're forbidden in the license from actually making this easy to determine is just silly.

--Steve

 

[Henry]

Having spoken with OGL Publishers before, I know that common etiquette in the community is to let others know when you are using their material in another work. However, this works just like any other point of etiquette - most do, some don't, and none of it is legally binding.

 

[Gilwen]

Let me be the second to say, well, ewww, to your analogy. You're right, though, WotC would just say "no" if I asked to put that sentence in my product.

To me it seems silly to make the only place you're going to reference the source for your open content be section 15 of the license. If you look at that section, you can see that a reader has almost no way to know exactly what you used, which is really too bad. When I look at a product that uses the OGL, I immediately turn to the license and see if they've used material that I'm familiar with from other sources. The fact that you're forbidden in the license from actually making this easy to determine is just silly.

--Steve

Yah Ranger I'd leave you dirty too

As for the citing the source thing. The license is attempting to protect your work from claims of compatibility (stopping claims of compatibility with DnD was probably the driving force), at least that's how I see it. if you want to refer to other's trademarks then you have to get a little creative within the scope of the license. The license my cite other reasons but it's be a while since I read it word for word and honestly don't remember.

If I were a publisher I wouldn't want someone to take my OGC, screw it up or apply it in a way that might reflect poorly on my company and then be able to tie it directly to my company by citing it inline or any number of other possible ways. Or to be able to source a piece of OGC and then be able to claim their product was compatiable with my line when in fact it might not be outside of whatever OGC they reused.

I don't necessary like the way the section 15 is done because you have to reproduce it exactly from every source which means you have things in your final section 15 that you may not even have sourced, even indirecdtly.

If you want to force ppl to cite you then in your S.15 you can add text to it and they have to reproduce it exactly.

Gil

 

[Bardsandsages]

If I were a publisher I wouldn't want someone to take my OGC, screw it up or apply it in a way that might reflect poorly on my company and then be able to tie it directly to my company by citing it inline or any number of other possible ways. Or to be able to source a piece of OGC and then be able to claim their product was compatiable with my line when in fact it might not be outside of whatever OGC they reused.

Yes, basically it is worded to prevent people from piggybacking on the reputation of other publishers. It's one thing to use Ronin Arts OGC, it's another thing to advertise USES CONTENT FROM RONIN ARTS!!! Such statements have the implication of approval, when in fact they do not. The OGL gives you access to the information, not the reputation, of other publishers.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

From a personal standpoint, I would, of course, hope that anyone wanting to use content of mine in their product would at least let me know in advance. That's the main point of my post. So I guess a second question (which could be its own post altogether) would be directed at publishers, and that is, "Do you let people know in advance if/when you plan to use their work (or derivatives) in your products?"

I can't speak for anyone else, but for me, it depends on the content.

If I'm referencing a whole subsystem or a lot of content (for example, multiple monsters from a book), I'll contact the original creator (or at least the place I found it ). If it's just a feat here or a spell there, I'll just reprint the material and call it a day, figuring it's too little for the source to want to be pestered about.

Of course, the last time I referenced a subsystem, it was from a dead company, so I had no one to ask.

Just OOC, why do you want to be notified?

 

[ChimericDream]

Just OOC, why do you want to be notified?

Honestly, it's that Good Feeling that I would get knowing that at least *something* I've come up with is being noticed and is considered useful and different enough to borrow/steal/use. So... vanity, mostly.

 

[Ranger REG]

Ranger REG - That is not an image I want to conjure up before breakfast... or any other time for that matter... I think I'll just leave you dirty

But you do get my gist, right?

If so, then my work is done.

 

[Ranger REG]

To me it seems silly to make the only place you're going to reference the source for your open content be section 15 of the license. If you look at that section, you can see that a reader has almost no way to know exactly what you used, which is really too bad.

For who? If you cite the source, the author of said source would look to your product and find which one of his you used and make sure it is properly used.

Most readers don't care about what sources you used. They care about the product in front of them when they purchased it. The license is for other game designers and lawyers.