What benefit is there for a smart/careful 3pp to use the GSL?

[Scribble]

Scribble, the problem is that the GSL is designed to help kill off the OGL by not allowing 3pps to go back. Killing off the OGL is a thing for fans who have been loyal WoTC customers and still love 3.5/OGL games and an unforunate position to put 3pps into.

I dissagree. People keep saying it's designed to kill off the OGL. If that were true, wouldn't the language be more along the lines of, once you go GSL you can never make any product (regardless of line) under the OGL?

I see it as designed to keep 4th Edition D&D out of the OGL. They didn't release it as OGL, and do not want it to be in the OGL, or used to support OGL competition.

They want a bit more control over how their brand is used, and effected by outside parties.

But thats aside from the point. You asked what benefit was there to 3pp signing and using the GSL.

There isn't one 3pp who wouldn't happily create 4e products if there wasn't the threat of the GSL being revoked or changed any time.

If I own a business that makes t-shirts, and decide to make mickey mouse t-shirts, and pay Disney for that right there is always a chance Disney could turn around and yank those rights. My business choice obviously should be based on whether I feel the profit (selling MM shirts) outweighs the risks (Disney suddenly without warning and for no real reason yanking my license.)


Also, since that's the case, I probably shouldn't put all my eggs in the MM shirt market. Any good business owner should have multiple avenues of revenue. Case in point: Paizo. WoTC chose not to extend their magazine license, but because the company was smart, they didn't put all of their resources into just the magazines. The company reamined alive, and may actually begin making a higher profit because of business decisions related to the magazine going away!

MOre 3pps creating adventures and settings for 4e makes for more 4e customers.

Not nesscesarily.

If they harm the image of D&D they might end up doing more harm then good. If I make my aformentioned T-Shirts with Mickey Mouse in excessive pornographic situations, will that drive Disney's predominently family oriented customers to their parks?

I can see the GSL not allowing 3pps to create entire games off the 4e rules as happend with the SRD under the OGL. NO one is asking WoTC to help create its own competition. However there is a difference between that and attemting to kill off the OGL altogether by not even allowing 3pps to make supplements that support 4e and 3.5e (or whatever d20 game system one chooses).

They're protecting their brand, and use of their brand. Not just people making new systems off of their designs, but also people using their brand to help promote other systems.

Aside from that, again I don't believe the GSL is designed to "kill off" the OGL. (See above) Just to keep D&D 4e out of it, and to keep D&D 4e from being used to promote a competitor's product.

The GSL is basically elements of the STL and the OGL mixed into one. The difference is this time they're keeping control of more of their IP, and not releasing it into the OGL, while still allowing people access to that IP. They're attempting to make the IP stronger, and more meaningful, and not just assuming their IP will be an overwhelming draw.

I think it is anti-gaming community to attempt to put the OGL genie back in the bottle and sad that WoTC, the company that created the OGL, is attempting to orchestrate its death.

See above.

And you ask "Why not just create some other IP?" Easier said than done my friend. Creating a major release such as a flagship setting is very hard work. Its fun but its difficult. Its hard in regards to time input and in terms of creative energy. Of course one could create some adventures for 4e because they are just one-offs but major IP release under the GSL is IMO an unwise move.

Shrug? Make a chocie. Which avenue will bring in more revenue? Support D&D with your major IP, or support another OGL game. It's a business choice.

Which one brings you more revenue?

Monte Cook made a rpetty good run at supporting D&D, until he eventually decided to spin off into his own system and settings. After which we saw a noticeable drop in his products designed to support D&D. He made a business choice as to which line to support.

Not being able to support OGL with your GSL products, doesn't indicate that companies cannot make a profit just supporting D&D with that product.

Can you turnt he profit you want or need by supporting D&D? If so, then you can sign the GSL and take advantage of what it offers. (acess to the D&D brand.) Otherwise, perhaps you want to make another business choice.

Also, (I'm honestly not sure) how many 3pp release products designed to support OGL based games, that weren't D&D? (ie how many people released products designed to be used with True20, or Arcana Unearthed, or Iron Heroes?)

I'm not saying that it isn't within WoTC's rights to create a restrictive GSL but it is equally within the bounds of copyright law for 3pps to legally skirt the GSL so long as they don't tread on WoTC's IP in a way that goes beyond that allowed by law.

Awesome. That's a choice you make as a business. But by doing so, you do not gain the advantages listed above. (plus it seems like more of a PiTA, but that's just me... I'm lazy I guess.)

You're coming from the position that WoTC released the GSL to stop others from making products for D&D. If you're making a product that supports D&D and the sale of D&D, I doubt you'll hear much from them.

If you start trying to use their brand to market your product without following their guidelines.. You will probably have a problem.

Thumb my nose at WoTC???

No, maintain control of my hard work despite the whims of a corporation that, naturally, doesn't have my best interest in mind. You are going to get people thumbing their nose at WoTC BECAUSE of the GSL because it leaves a bad taste in the mouth of many who would have otherwise supported 4e.

Here's an example of what I mean: The Book of Erotic Fantasy.

WoTC made the choice that it didn't feel excessive nudity / adult situations helped the image of their brand in the market place. They changed the STL to say they couldn't use the STL for that type of product.

The makers of TBoEF released it anyway without the STL under OGL.

They want a little more control this time around as to how their brand is used. (Mainly I think because they're trying to grow the market for their brand.)


Also: Think of the GSL as kin of like a franchise... I can buy into a Dunkin Donuts franchise. When I do, I agree to certain terms and conditions. I need to market things a certain way, can only charge certain prices, and have to honor all promotions and coupons. I aso can't just start calling myself Happy Super Donut, and use all of Dunkin Donuts's resources to promote Happy Super Donut.

In return I get certain benefits of the brand, and such.

 

[Raven Crowking]

I dissagree. People keep saying it's designed to kill off the OGL. If that were true, wouldn't the language be more along the lines of, once you go GSL you can never make any product (regardless of line) under the OGL?

Wasn't that what was first indicated by WotC, prior to the GSL actually being launched? From what I can gather, either the outcry from fans and/or publishers, or the sheer inability to enforce such a provision, caused WotC to change their minds.

WotC can still make 4e and OGL game, or alter the GSL to remove the obvious problems it contains. Until WotC does so, I believe it is perfectly reasonable to continue to lambast WotC for this (IMHO) ass-backwards decision.

I see it as designed to keep 4th Edition D&D out of the OGL. They didn't release it as OGL, and do not want it to be in the OGL, or used to support OGL competition.

Of course, they also promised us that 4e would be OGL. Then that it would be published under "an OGL". I agree with you that they want control over how their brand is used, and effected by outside parties, but I disagree entirely when you describe that control as "a bit more". It is not "a bit more" control; it is total control.


RC

 

[Raven Crowking]

Also: Think of the GSL as kin of like a franchise... I can buy into a Dunkin Donuts franchise. When I do, I agree to certain terms and conditions. I need to market things a certain way, can only charge certain prices, and have to honor all promotions and coupons. I aso can't just start calling myself Happy Super Donut, and use all of Dunkin Donuts's resources to promote Happy Super Donut.

Interestingly enough, I know a guy who's family opened a franchise resteraunt here in Canada. A lot of his complaints with the franchise revolved around the home company doing things like (for instance) making a deal with a T-Shirt company, and then forcing their franchises to buy X number of T-Shirts from that company (the main corporation getting a kickback from said T-Shirt company). Despite the fact that the T-Shirt prices were inflated far beyond what the going rate for such product might otherwise be.

The head office also demanded that the franchise buy ingredients from substandard suppliers for higher than average prices, again because the head office gained a profit in so doing. They demanded the right to install coin-operated machines on premises and to take any profit garnered by the same.

It isn't enough to consider the profit you can earn when making a business decision. You also need to consider the risks you take.

When you enter a franchise relationship, you never know what the head office is going to demand. Ultimately, your only bargaining chip against those demands is to take down the "Dunkin Donuts" sign and put up a "Happy Super Donuts" sign instead.

Of course, the GSL doesn't exactly allow that. It's pretty darn specific that if your store goes the GSL route, you don't get to go "Happy Super OGL" unless you also buy all new fixtures and a new storefront.

Good luck with that.


RC

 

[Scribble]

Wasn't that what was first indicated by WotC, prior to the GSL actually being launched? From what I can gather, either the outcry from fans and/or publishers, or the sheer inability to enforce such a provision, caused WotC to change their minds.

WotC can still make 4e and OGL game, or alter the GSL to remove the obvious problems it contains. Until WotC does so, I believe it is perfectly reasonable to continue to lambast WotC for this (IMHO) ass-backwards decision.

Who am I to stop anyone from lambasting anyone on the interweb about whatever topic they want.

He asked what the benefit of signing the GSl was for a 3pp. I answered.

Does the GSL allow 3pp to make money supporting D&D and use the D&D brand to do so? Yep.

Does it exersize a level of control over how you go about supporting D&D? You betcha.

Are the benefits significant... Dunno yet. I get the feeling it very well may be, because of that whole if it looks like a duck thing...

Is it harmful to the OGL? Possibly I don't honestly know. The OGL is eternal, so it can't kill it, but if more people decide to support D&D then it might not be worth it to invest product into it... But hey that's life. If more people invest their bellies into big macs and it ends up killing burger king... Shrug.

Should all this weigh in on your business descisions? Probably, but that's not my choice to make.

Of course, they also promised us that 4e would be OGL.

Did they?

Then that it would be published under "an OGL".

I don't put too much stock in company "promises." Things always change. I base my own purchases and such off of the actual product brought to market.

I agree with you that they want control over how their brand is used, and effected by outside parties, but I disagree entirely when you describe that control as "a bit more". It is not "a bit more" control; it is total control.

Eh... I don't know. I think they largely had no control before, so any control seems like a lot. If they want to grow what their brand is worth, they also have to have control over how it's used.

But again... it's like the Mickey Mouse T-Shirts. Do the benefits of Mickey ouweigh the pitfals of using someone else's brand to make your wallet.


Hell I'm an employee... My employer could fire my behind at any moment for any given reason, but the benefits of a bi-monthly paycheck, health benefits, commuter benefits, and a 401k outweigh the possibility of being canned.

For others that differs.

 

[Scribble]

Interestingly enough, I know a guy who's family opened a franchise resteraunt here in Canada...

It isn't enough to consider the profit you can earn when making a business decision. You also need to consider the risks you take.

Yup. I agree completely. Any business decision shouldn't be made lightly. You need to take all of the info you have into account, and what benefits you have vrs your risks.

When you enter a franchise relationship, you never know what the head office is going to demand. Ultimately, your only bargaining chip against those demands is to take down the "Dunkin Donuts" sign and put up a "Happy Super Donuts" sign instead.

Yup.

Of course, the GSL doesn't exactly allow that. It's pretty darn specific that if your store goes the GSL route, you don't get to go "Happy Super OGL" unless you also buy all new fixtures and a new storefront.

Same with happy Super Donut as well though. You will need to take down the trademarks, and make sure you're not selling Dunkin Donuts stuff, and not try to ask Dunkin Donuts to supply you with wehatever market info they give you and what not.

So you back out of the GSL. The IP is still yours. WoTC doesnt want you to use it in another agreement you technically made with them. (also it appears the infamous "poison pill" only applies to stuff converted to GSL for some reason...)

You can still use the IP in your own game, or try to market it to some other game. (Not OGL they do exist I swear!)

But then again, those are all parts of those benefits vrs risk descisions you make...

 

[jdrakeh]

A lot of people seem to be VERY scared of Wizards and their non-existing Cease and Desist letters (which aren't going to be sent to either Kenzer or Goodman) for no apparent reason.

WotC sent out cease and desist letters to publishers in violation of the d20 STL and OGL. Fast Forward Entertainment was effectively shut down due to the obscene number of license violations cited. The cease and desist orders aren't "non-existing" on this Earth. As for infringement, incorrect citation or representation of trademarks is cause for legal action and has nothing to do with copyright infringment.