I'm writing this in the hopes that some of the creators of 4e are listening. (I would also ask it not be moved to OGL-F since this affects 4e and I've found more people read this forum, and the license for 4e hasn't been seen yet).
The GSL is the new license. We know this is happening. We also know it will be more restricted that the OGL. I personally am okay with that. But since the users of the license also matter I think we can ask for certain things.
1) Give us the ability to use your Product Identity and the Trademark, even if we have to give up certain more rights, such as Wizards owning the copyright or something. That is, allow us to create a module using Mind Flayers and Beholders. I'm sure the fans will appreciate it, especially those who aren't making money but want to share their own creations.
2) Allow us to create derivative rules and allow us to lock them down if we see fit. Since it's derived from your ruleset, you may reserve the right to use them yourselves--I know any lawyer will tell you that, to prevent the odd "simultaneous idea" situation from turning into a lawsuit--but allow the other publishers to create stuff they can then choose to release to others for nothing but attribution, or to get special permission first. This will allow the people making money off the other adventures to create new rules without being ripped or used by others. Think of it similar to using the Creative Commons--there are different licenses you can apply. Give the creators more control over how their own contributions get reused. Let company A decide if their book of cool monsters can be used without a license, or if you need special permission. This allows authors to have a little more control over their bottom line.
3) I understand if you need to have a morals clause. However, rather than do a strict bureaucratic "ethics code" with lots of definitions, why not just leave it in general terms, because that should prevent most creative problems. If you did this, I would ask you not abuse that trust, people are suspicious of using this as a "catch-all" to shut down the most popular competitor. Maybe you can allow somebody like GAMA to arbitrate if there's a request to take it down if you believe there's an code of standards violation.
4) If you allow people to put up content for non-profit purposes, don't limit it to one location. While the DI and Gleemax are good, it wouldn't be considered a good thing if that was the only place you could put GSL content. Please respect your audience in this regard.
Anybody else have any ideas or considerations?
The GSL is the new license. We know this is happening. We also know it will be more restricted that the OGL. I personally am okay with that. But since the users of the license also matter I think we can ask for certain things.
1) Give us the ability to use your Product Identity and the Trademark, even if we have to give up certain more rights, such as Wizards owning the copyright or something. That is, allow us to create a module using Mind Flayers and Beholders. I'm sure the fans will appreciate it, especially those who aren't making money but want to share their own creations.
2) Allow us to create derivative rules and allow us to lock them down if we see fit. Since it's derived from your ruleset, you may reserve the right to use them yourselves--I know any lawyer will tell you that, to prevent the odd "simultaneous idea" situation from turning into a lawsuit--but allow the other publishers to create stuff they can then choose to release to others for nothing but attribution, or to get special permission first. This will allow the people making money off the other adventures to create new rules without being ripped or used by others. Think of it similar to using the Creative Commons--there are different licenses you can apply. Give the creators more control over how their own contributions get reused. Let company A decide if their book of cool monsters can be used without a license, or if you need special permission. This allows authors to have a little more control over their bottom line.
3) I understand if you need to have a morals clause. However, rather than do a strict bureaucratic "ethics code" with lots of definitions, why not just leave it in general terms, because that should prevent most creative problems. If you did this, I would ask you not abuse that trust, people are suspicious of using this as a "catch-all" to shut down the most popular competitor. Maybe you can allow somebody like GAMA to arbitrate if there's a request to take it down if you believe there's an code of standards violation.
4) If you allow people to put up content for non-profit purposes, don't limit it to one location. While the DI and Gleemax are good, it wouldn't be considered a good thing if that was the only place you could put GSL content. Please respect your audience in this regard.
Anybody else have any ideas or considerations?
