The New GSL--What we want.

[jezter6]

I think what I meant was - you may not be able to COPY the paragraph in your work, however you may be able to use the GSRD to provide a link (ie: PHB Pg6, Para3) instead.

You may not be able to use the actual text of paragraph 3, in whole or in part.

 

[Nellisir]

As for the OP and locking down Open Content, I'm not buying it. Open Conent was supposed to be the big end-all to reinventing the wheel. You need a 'wheel' feet, you found it somewhere and put it into your book and cited the original. However, we've seen that (with minor exceptions) most of the major publishers are reinventing the wheel for each product they write. How many 'wheel' splatbooks are necessary to rewrite the same material over and over and over? It was a good idea to open it up, but in practice, just hasn't happened.

I think the learning curve re the OGL and reusing OGC was slower than almost everyone, including me, expected. That said, I think it is happening.

 

[Ranger REG]

I think what I meant was - you may not be able to COPY the paragraph in your work, however you may be able to use the GSRD to provide a link (ie: PHB Pg6, Para3) instead.

You may not be able to use the actual text of paragraph 3, in whole or in part.

So, they're also changing the legal definition of "Use."

Section 1(g) "Use", "Used" or "Using" means to use, Distribute, copy, edit, format, modify, translate and otherwise create Derivative Material of Open Game Content.

What about third-party OGC (not your own), or do I have to refer/link to their appropriate source, too?

 

[Nellisir]

So, they're also changing the legal definition of "Use."

What about third-party OGC (not your own), or do I have to refer/link to their appropriate source, too?

Given WotC's stated motivations, I don't think Jezter's hypotheticals are unreasonable as far as WotC's material goes. It's hard to say how 3rd-party products will work. Maybe there won't be any 3rd-party reuse - everything will point back to core D&D.

 

[Ranger REG]

Sighs. Maybe it is a good thing the GSL is not the new OGL. :\

 

[Nellisir]

Sighs. Maybe it is a good thing the GSL is not the new OGL. :\

Why?

 

[barsoomcore]

I've said it before; I'll say it again -- the licensing of 4e is about the internet. WotC is making a play for online accessories in the D&D world, and they want to make sure there's no possibility of open source competition. Hence the GSL. There will be no 4e versions of PCGen, so that everyone will use WotC tools.

Heck, if nothing else they'll be able to sell banner ads. That'll probably double the D&D revenue stream right there.

 

[Ranger REG]

Why?

Because GSL not worth using it, unless you want to support (or link your product to) 4e products.

 

[xechnao]

I've said it before; I'll say it again -- the licensing of 4e is about the internet. WotC is making a play for online accessories in the D&D world, and they want to make sure there's no possibility of open source competition. Hence the GSL. There will be no 4e versions of PCGen, so that everyone will use WotC tools.

Heck, if nothing else they'll be able to sell banner ads. That'll probably double the D&D revenue stream right there.

Then they are in a dilemma to even allow for 4e 3rd party support unless their online tools somehow are flexible enough to accept 3rd party material. Perhaps this is what they are working on GSL and thus takes them more time.

 

[Ranger REG]

Then they are in a dilemma to even allow for 4e 3rd party support unless their online tools somehow are flexible enough to accept 3rd party material. Perhaps this is what they are working on GSL and thus takes them more time.

Wait a minute. It's okay to code in third-party material into their online tool, but you can't code third-party material -- or anything designated "open content" -- into an independent software program?

Correct me if I'm wrong.