Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="mxyzplk" data-source="post: 4692832" data-attributes="member: 16450">He's not the only one.They are not letting people use their IP out of the goodness of their hearts.&nbsp; They are doing it because they see (correctly) that it is in their best business interest to do so.&nbsp; Having a vibrant partner community increases overall interest in gaming and D&amp;D in particular, and it gives people product to use with these corebooks that Wizards would never get around to publishing themselves.&nbsp; None of this is charity.In the commission of setting up an allegedly free, community-wide license to promote this business goal, they decided to issue one that was totally and, yes, unfairly stacked in Wizards' direction, and that allowed for little benefit/high risk to those partners.&nbsp; It *didn't* adequately let partners profit while doing work to promote Wizards.&nbsp; So it got a big vote of no confidence.&nbsp; Whether that's a &quot;kick in the teeth&quot; is based on your own private metaphor engine.&nbsp; But its terms were so unacceptable few would uptake it.&nbsp; And I think it's fair to be insulted when anyone hands you a contract that is ridiculously stacked in one party's favor.&nbsp; It shows a fundamental lack of respect for your stake in the partnership.They have revised it - it is still a deck strongly stacked in their favor, but it's at least able to be considered by a smart company.&nbsp; Will it be enough?&nbsp; It still has a lot of clauses of concern.&nbsp; Again, whether it's a &quot;kick in the shins&quot; is between you and your bard.&nbsp; It's certainly not as friendly to a licensee as licenses some other companies are using - the OGL, especially. Anyway, taking the position that either version of the GSL is an outpouring of Wizards' love and charity upon us and that no one should criticize them is silly.&nbsp; It establishes a business relationship; in this case a relationship between them and potentially most of us, in one way or another.&nbsp; So everyone has standing to complain about the terms in it that are unfair, not competitive with what is found otherwise in the marketplace, etc.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="mxyzplk, post: 4692832, member: 16450"] He's not the only one. They are not letting people use their IP out of the goodness of their hearts. They are doing it because they see (correctly) that it is in their best business interest to do so. Having a vibrant partner community increases overall interest in gaming and D&D in particular, and it gives people product to use with these corebooks that Wizards would never get around to publishing themselves. None of this is charity. In the commission of setting up an allegedly free, community-wide license to promote this business goal, they decided to issue one that was totally and, yes, unfairly stacked in Wizards' direction, and that allowed for little benefit/high risk to those partners. It *didn't* adequately let partners profit while doing work to promote Wizards. So it got a big vote of no confidence. Whether that's a "kick in the teeth" is based on your own private metaphor engine. But its terms were so unacceptable few would uptake it. And I think it's fair to be insulted when anyone hands you a contract that is ridiculously stacked in one party's favor. It shows a fundamental lack of respect for your stake in the partnership. They have revised it - it is still a deck strongly stacked in their favor, but it's at least able to be considered by a smart company. Will it be enough? It still has a lot of clauses of concern. Again, whether it's a "kick in the shins" is between you and your bard. It's certainly not as friendly to a licensee as licenses some other companies are using - the OGL, especially. Anyway, taking the position that either version of the GSL is an outpouring of Wizards' love and charity upon us and that no one should criticize them is silly. It establishes a business relationship; in this case a relationship between them and potentially most of us, in one way or another. So everyone has standing to complain about the terms in it that are unfair, not competitive with what is found otherwise in the marketplace, etc. [/QUOTE]

Verification