Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="JohnRTroy" data-source="post: 4370787" data-attributes="member: 2732">To be perfectly honest, I predict the following.WoTC probably won't care about publishers making generic adventures as long as their trademarks aren't violated, and as long as they don't delve into ripping off the IP &quot;fluff&quot;--no Forgotten Realms adventures, no use of the monsters they consider &quot;Unique PI&quot;.&nbsp; Etc.WoTC also won't care if some publishers stick with 3.5 and the GSL.I think Wizards has a specific problem with the OGL combined with 4e, and doesn't not want any of the 4e game being &quot;reverse-engineered&quot; and simultaneously released under an OGL license.&nbsp;&nbsp; I'm not sure why--maybe the &quot;safe harbour&quot; clause actually hurts them because they want the right to reserve shutting down a problematic publisher (not from a greed standpoint, but from a QA or ethical standpoint), and a safe harbour clause might interfere.&nbsp; Maybe they specifically don't like the &quot;viral&quot; clause, which sort of makes it hard to revoke objectionable material.&nbsp; I can only speculate.I have a feeling the first person, publisher, or consortium who attempts to create a version of 4e under the OGL will be sued, regardless of how small they are.&nbsp; I believe the OGL is the key objection WoTC has, not the creation of generic products that are compatible with 4e, nor the continued use of 3.5 OGL rules.So, my best guess is that publishers will be safer if they do the following.Use the legal means compatible systems have been published before, don't reference specific WoTC creations, use more common mythological creatures, make sure the stat blocks are &quot;different enough&quot;, and don't advertise using the trademarks.&nbsp; As far as benefits using the GSL go--well, you get the benefit of using the official &quot;Dungeons and Dragons&quot; trademark, and it seems fans care more about that than radical game changes, and with the d20 glut hurting stores, a /good/ product with the D&amp;D logo might sell better than those without.&nbsp; And even if the GSL is later shelved, certain product might be recycled--you can't use the OGL, but that doesn't mean you can't reserve your copyright, strip out game references, and either create your own system or use a non-OGL system.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="JohnRTroy, post: 4370787, member: 2732"] To be perfectly honest, I predict the following. WoTC probably won't care about publishers making generic adventures as long as their trademarks aren't violated, and as long as they don't delve into ripping off the IP "fluff"--no Forgotten Realms adventures, no use of the monsters they consider "Unique PI". Etc. WoTC also won't care if some publishers stick with 3.5 and the GSL. I think Wizards has a specific problem with the OGL combined with 4e, and doesn't not want any of the 4e game being "reverse-engineered" and simultaneously released under an OGL license. I'm not sure why--maybe the "safe harbour" clause actually hurts them because they want the right to reserve shutting down a problematic publisher (not from a greed standpoint, but from a QA or ethical standpoint), and a safe harbour clause might interfere. Maybe they specifically don't like the "viral" clause, which sort of makes it hard to revoke objectionable material. I can only speculate. I have a feeling the first person, publisher, or consortium who attempts to create a version of 4e under the OGL will be sued, regardless of how small they are. I believe the OGL is the key objection WoTC has, not the creation of generic products that are compatible with 4e, nor the continued use of 3.5 OGL rules. So, my best guess is that publishers will be safer if they do the following. Use the legal means compatible systems have been published before, don't reference specific WoTC creations, use more common mythological creatures, make sure the stat blocks are "different enough", and don't advertise using the trademarks. As far as benefits using the GSL go--well, you get the benefit of using the official "Dungeons and Dragons" trademark, and it seems fans care more about that than radical game changes, and with the d20 glut hurting stores, a /good/ product with the D&D logo might sell better than those without. And even if the GSL is later shelved, certain product might be recycled--you can't use the OGL, but that doesn't mean you can't reserve your copyright, strip out game references, and either create your own system or use a non-OGL system. [/QUOTE]

Verification