The Ethics of Sharing Open Content

[DanMcS]

The fact that something is legal doesn't mean that you should do it. There are plenty of perfectly legal things you can do which you shouldn't.

If people get into the habit of exploiting as much OGC as they are legally allowed to, the result is that publishers will stop releasing large sections of OGC. That's detrimental to all, because large sections of OGC mean that you can use the bits you need without exploiting the product as a whole.

This is the kind of thing publishers say because they want to have their cake and eat it too. They like being able to use WotC's open content so they can publish d20 books, as it's a very good market for them, but they don't like other people reusing their content, because they're selfish.

There has not yet been any explosion of people offering open content from published books on the web. Many publishers (Malhavoc from the beginning, Badaxe lately) release crippleware OGC anyway. They can hardly claim that people redistributing their OGC will drive them to crippling their OGC, since they do without the redistributing existing.

If publishers can't deal mentally with the way the OGL enables reuse of their material, they should drop out of the d20 market right now, and publish their fantasy games using their own house systems, the way all those companies that went out of business publishing D&D-alikes did before the OGL. If they want to have the benefits of the OGL and the d20 license, they should embrace it wholeheartedly.

If selfish publishers start crippling their OGC even more, or leave the market, they won't be missed. The barrier to entering the publishing market is very low, especially via pdf, and they will be quickly replaced.

 

[philreed]

Many publishers (Malhavoc from the beginning, Badaxe lately) release crippleware OGC anyway. They can hardly claim that people redistributing their OGC will drive them to crippling their OGC, since they do without the redistributing existing.

Ronin Arts doesn't release "crippled" OGC. Almost all of our products are 100% OGC. For that matter, a lot of companies don't release "crippled" OGC. Bastion, Green Ronin, the Bad Axe Games products I have, several Fantasy Flight Games products I own -- these all have a lot of OGC.

If the fans REALLY give a damn about the status of OGC in a product why don't they prove it by supporting the publishers that don't "cripple" OGC? I see a lot of discussion about how OGC should be free online but little talk about rewarding those publishers that have released a lot of OGC. Companies like Green Ronin and Bastion have released more OGC that Wizards -- if it matters why aren't people out there supporting Green Ronin and Bastion?

 

[Mark]

In my opinion, people should be very careful about imposing their own ethical view upon others, especially where it infringes upon a person's legal rights.

 

[barsoomcore]

In my opinion, since there IS no way of imposing one's ethical views upon others, people should stop trying.

It's INTERESTING to share one's views of ethics, but it's futile to insist other people agree with you.

 

[Crothian]

This is the kind of thing publishers say because they want to have their cake and eat it too. They like being able to use WotC's open content so they can publish d20 books, as it's a very good market for them, but they don't like other people reusing their content, because they're selfish.

There is a difference between reusing and reproducing. Reusing is making another book and using the OGC from other books. That has been going on for years and people like it. That's one of the great things about the OGL. It allows books to use the best rules out there and not have to completely re event the rules. That's not what is happening here.

Reproducing the OGC is stripping away all the stuff that isn't OGL and putting it out for free at no cost ot the person doing it. The publishers are not being selfish. They both getting and eating cake, whatever that is supposed to mean.

 

[BryonD]

There is a difference between reusing and reproducing.

In which part of the OGL is this difference defined?

 

[Savage Jim]

Ronin Arts doesn't release "crippled" OGC. Almost all of our products are 100% OGC. For that matter, a lot of companies don't release "crippled" OGC. Bastion, Green Ronin, the Bad Axe Games products I have, several Fantasy Flight Games products I own -- these all have a lot of OGC.

If the fans REALLY give a damn about the status of OGC in a product why don't they prove it by supporting the publishers that don't "cripple" OGC? I see a lot of discussion about how OGC should be free online but little talk about rewarding those publishers that have released a lot of OGC. Companies like Green Ronin and Bastion have released more OGC that Wizards -- if it matters why aren't people out there supporting Green Ronin and Bastion?

Actually, it's my own tendancy to purchase products from companies that have a proven record of OGC-re-use-friendly products. Bastion, Green Ronin, Studio Ronin, Fantasy Flight, and various others. A few companies have been "written off" either for their use of crippled-OGC (Mongoose, Malhavoc), confusing or repeatedly incorrect/incompleate OGC-declarations (Mongoose, Living Imagination), and cripple-ware online publishing techniques (Malhavoc).

Personally, I don't see myself re-producing entire works of OGC for distribution, although my previous online/fan-based efforts (and thus my future online/fan-based efforts) have never hesitated to reproduce a rule, feat, weapon, spell, monster, or anything else that I've adopted into my various campaigns (following the terms of the license, of course). At the same time, I'm not of the opinion that reproducing entire works of OGC is being "unethical" in any regard. Quite the contrary: By the terms of the license, the publishers have already agreed to allow it. As a result, publishers that whine about the possibility* of such a thing often only prove one thing to me: That they're whiners.

*After all this time, has such a thing actually occured? Or, after 4 years, are people still debating over a speculated scenario?

 

[Crothian]

huh.... :\

 

[BryonD]

*Ducks before he gets smacked*

 

[barsoomcore]

*smacks BryonD for being a smug bastard*

Yes, it was funny. Yes, it was rude. Yes, it was funny. Yes, it was rude...