Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ruemere" data-source="post: 4588408" data-attributes="member: 5515">*rant alert*I would be surprised if any publisher could produce a viable business plan based on revised GSL. You either use what's there now or continue with OGL or use another system/license.Another thing which occurs to me, is that the whole process of GSL delivery is flawed. It's not that you have to get approval from lawyers, organize a lot of meetings with busy people and arrange significant amount information. I have seen such complicated projects going through numerous stages and yet still being delivered within months, not years, and with satisfactory level of result instead of unfair and vague terms of current GSL.The following things continue to bother me:- why the broken promise of GSL? The early adopters program (failure), no dialogue with publishers (distinct mismanagement of communication), no respect for established publishers (distinct lack of respect for contributors).It would have been so easy to produce extended d20 STL with fixed revocation to provide support for third parties. It would have been so easy, via early adopters program, to produce statement on intentions and restrictions to be introduced with GSL. Bound by NDA, the early adopters could provide valuable insight and quite a lot of legal help.The resources, culture, support and positive approach was out there - it was wasted.- why the problematic nature of GSL?If you want to cover future products, you do not try to cover them immediately - you set up approval process via which they enter or fail to enter GSL. For example, there numerous examples of closed beta licenses, licenses which specifically exclude immature project information and so on.Scott and Linae did not have to produce an unwieldy behemoth - they could have created a process to produce data instead of attempting to cover all bases with a single run.- the lawyers are not an excuse.Yes, that's true there are other, more restrictive or less fair licenses out there. The OGL, GPL prove that licenses do not need to be unfair. All you need is a lawyer who can think in terms of respecting consumer rights.Corporate lawyers tend to produce overly problematic stuff, but that's why you get consultation from experts - Ryan Dancey could do this, couldn't he?- delay from meetings and different priorities are signs of mismanagement.This is very public type of a project. To get it going, you produce a base, set up development process rules and assign deadlines.Does anyone remember how the original SRD was updated with new material instead of being delivered with ready to run goods immediately?It's not easy, but again, there were people in WotC who pulled it off previously. Also, if anyone states that there are higher priorities than these, and the person happens to be in charge of liaising with online community, it is simply informing in no uncertain terms, that the project in question is regarded as less important, and consequently, people who are looking to project results, are less important.*sigh*Rant over. GSL failed. Let's sweep it under carpet.Regards,Ruemere</blockquote>

Verification