Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Alzrius" data-source="post: 9606860" data-attributes="member: 8461">Before anything else, I want to stress that none of these were particularly egregious, or even all that notable; certainly nothing which would make me concerned that this video is peddling bad information. It's just minor things which made me sigh (even then, I'm particularly plugged into this topic, so take my stance with a grain of salt). To name the ones that most readily come to mind:<ul>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">At around 13:16, when Bob Tarantino is talking about the debut of the OGL in 2000, the screen puts up the text &quot;Open Game License Version 1.0a,&quot; which makes it sound like 2000 was when the OGL v1.0a debuted. But that's not correct; we got the OGL v1.0 in 2000, and the OGL v1.0a came out a few years later (which was almost identical; all that changed was that two instances of &quot;Trademark&quot; in the first license became &quot;Trademark or Registered Trademark&quot; in the second).</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">He mentions at around 28:16 that in 2009, Paizo released Pathfinder, which was built on the OGL. That's true insofar as the first edition of the Pathfinder RPG goes, but Paizo had been releasing 3.5 material under the Pathfinder brand under the OGL since 2007.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">He says at about 30:48 that WotC &quot;put the OGL in Creative Commons.&quot; They didn't; they put the 5.1 SRD into the CC, which isn't the same.</li>
</ul>It's little things like that which I was referring to.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Alzrius, post: 9606860, member: 8461"] Before anything else, I want to stress that none of these were particularly egregious, or even all that notable; certainly nothing which would make me concerned that this video is peddling bad information. It's just minor things which made me sigh (even then, I'm particularly plugged into this topic, so take my stance with a grain of salt). To name the ones that most readily come to mind: [LIST] [*]At around 13:16, when Bob Tarantino is talking about the debut of the OGL in 2000, the screen puts up the text "Open Game License Version 1.0a," which makes it sound like 2000 was when the OGL v1.0a debuted. But that's not correct; we got the OGL v1.0 in 2000, and the OGL v1.0a came out a few years later (which was almost identical; all that changed was that two instances of "Trademark" in the first license became "Trademark or Registered Trademark" in the second). [*]He mentions at around 28:16 that in 2009, Paizo released Pathfinder, which was built on the OGL. That's true insofar as the first edition of the Pathfinder RPG goes, but Paizo had been releasing 3.5 material under the Pathfinder brand under the OGL since 2007. [*]He says at about 30:48 that WotC "put the OGL in Creative Commons." They didn't; they put the 5.1 SRD into the CC, which isn't the same. [/LIST] It's little things like that which I was referring to. [/QUOTE]

Verification