Why I only buy open content

[HalWhitewyrm]

Something tells me to stay out of this thread, but here I go nonetheless...

Are you saying that you never buy any products from Mongoose, Malhavoc, or any other publishers with restrictive OGC declarations?

For the most part, yes, that is my case. It's not a general blanket edict as I just purchased d20 Apocalypse last week and I'm loving it, but more often than not, I'll just look at them at the store and end up leaving them there unless they absolutely blow me away. There's a reason I don't own Iron Heroes yet, though that is likely to change very soon, and it's a testament to Erik Mona's great ideas and hard work that I now purchase Dragon and Dungeon every so often whereas I just didn't before.

I don't like this attitude I've faced where you get blasted if you buy products based primarily on their OGC and declaration. It's my way of buying stuff, no one call tell me it's wrong, period, and it's as valid a reason to buy a product as any other. It sometimes means that I will consciously pass on a product I may have bought years ago, but that happens anyway. I don't like restrictive and/or convoluted OGC declarations and I vote with my wallet in those cases. For that same reason I make sure that my products appeal to those who purchase like me, so that it has as much value as possible. In this industry, publishers are also gamers, so there is little distinction to me when I am designing my products.

I have friends who just buy whatever as long as it helps their game, and that's cool and great for them because, like Kushner pointed out above, they are just some guys playing every week in a make-believe land and legalities are irrelevant to their pursuit, but although I am part of that group, I also have other interests in mind that regulate what I buy and what I don't. You don't see me blasting my friends for buying things indiscriminately, though they still do tease me from time to time (they're my friends, so they are allowed).

I've loved the OGL since it first saw the light of day, before I decided to start using it to write game stuff, and I love it more now than ever. Just please don't blast me for rewarding publishers whose products exhalt the OGL more than others.

All that said, I just placed my order for Iron Heroes.

 

[Morrus]

I don't like this attitude I've faced where you get blasted if you buy products based primarily on their OGC and declaration. It's my way of buying stuff, no one call tell me it's wrong, period, and it's as valid a reason to buy a product as any other.

Oh, that's utterly reasonable. I agree that nobody can tell you why or why not to buy a product.

What I think sometimes gets publishers' goats is the occasional implication - meant or not - that, conversely, their decisions on the use of the OGL are "wrong", or worse, somehow unethical. I appreciate that that's not always meant, but there does often seem to be an element of that in such posts.

I think that it's important to realise that, just like the customer has the right to make a decision based upon what he feels is best for him, so does the publisher. Neither party "owes" each other anything - they just do business or not depending on a variety of factors. This is just one of them - there are many, much more compelling factors which affect purchasing decisions.

 

[HalWhitewyrm]

What I think sometimes gets publishers' goats is the occasional implication - meant or not - that, conversely, their decisions on the use of the OGL are "wrong", or worse, somehow unethical. I appreciate that that's not always meant, but there does often seem to be an element of that in such posts.

I don't like that attitude either. We each do our thing, for our own reasons, and deal with the consequences, but I'm not about to tell X that the way they handle the OGL is wrong. I may not like it, but as long as it's within the legal parameters of the license, each can do as they please.

 

[Nikchick]

It is extremely generous, as I said, I love Green Ronin and True20. It's simply intellectually dishonest and disingenuous to simply reproduce the text simply to avoid the trademark. I'd feel much better simply telling people to buy True20 from Green Ronin. But I'm enjoined from doing that without getting permission first.

You're under no additional restriction when using the Open Game Content from True20 than you are when using the Open Game Content for any other project that uses the Open Game License. Everyone who agrees to use the Open Game License submits to the terms of the license, including the section that reads, in part, "...You agree not to indicate compatibility or co-adaptability with any Trademark or Registered Trademark in conjunction with a work containing Open Game Content except as expressly licensed in another, independent Agreement with the owner of such Trademark or Registered Trademark...."

True20 is our Trademark, we have established terms under which we will agree to its use by third parties. Our Open Game Content (and your use of it) is handled in exactly the same way as any of our other releases.

I'm am not saying these publishers are unfair or immoral or anything; I'm simply stating that there's a chilling effect whenever an artist needs permission to create art.

There is no requirement for you to get permission to create your art. Permission is required to use or indicate compatibility with our trademarks, but use of our trademark is not necessary to use the open content or for the creation of your art.

This is either something you're going to have to learn to deal with in the long run, or learn to accept that you're just creating stuff for your friends and family.

Monte is right on the money here.


Nicole

 

[Nellisir]

I'm not objecting to reuse when it's for a reason that's other than "we want everything to be free."

I know -I- never, ever, said anything like that. I'm pretty certain that wasn't where JBowtie was going either, since the thread is titled "Why I only buy Open Content", not "Why I don't buy Open Content" -- but I really can't speak for him.

My contentions have always been 1) that OGC declarations should be clear and unambigious (I saw one last night that left me flabbergasted at its blatant middle finger to that ideal -- and no, I won't say); and 2) that game mechanics should be OGC. I don't care what you charge; I don't care if you lock up your story material. I -like- story material. I buy campaign settings.

OGC declarations affect what I buy. Publishers are free to ignore that - I'm only one guy. But publishers that believe restricting, locking up, and obfuscating their OGC to preserve "their" market are ultimately relying on two negative assumptions - 1) that most customers are ignorant about OGC, and 2) that those who aren't ignorant about OGC don't assign it any value. Those assumptions are probably correct, for now. But I wouldn't bet on them forever, particularly if your market is the online segment of D&D players, who are more informed and more networked than any other segment.

Am I to be singled out and punished because I was generous and am now changing to adapt to constant pressure?

More likely because of the particular topic thread you chose to announce your more restrictive OGC policy. That's not a slam, just an observation.

Cheers,
Nell.

 

[Nellisir]

And that's the nice thing about game mechanics, for you. They aren't copyrightable, as they are an idea, and ideas can't be copyrighted. The description of them is, as is any substantial creative work.

You don't have to have never seen his work. Just implement the idea on your own, and you're good..

I can honestly say I wouldn't have thought about this idea without seeing it in AU first. I'd have a hard time recreating it without extrapolating guidelines from the existing material. It's kind of like being shown some wheels. A stone wheel, a wagon wheel, a solid wheel -- and then being told "build a wheel, but not one that looks anything like these". And, it just feels wrong. I may not like it, I may even dispute the legality, but I'm not going to try and end run around it. I don't want the potential legal hassles, I don't want the bad publicity, and I don't want to be the kind of person that does that. There are other ways to skin a cat. They're not as neat or satisfying, but I'll keep tinkering.

And, if more and more publishers start using more and more restrictive declarations of OGC, writers will be forced to resort to this more and more. And Iron Heroes, for example, won't appear in section 15 of your product where it would have before.

Yeah, I'm good there. Thieves World has a similar (different but equal) concept that I also like, and it's open. Guess which one is going into my S.15? If I ever get around to publishing, guess which one I'll ask permission to recommend in my Introduction?

Cheers,
Nell.

 

[philreed]

More likely because of the particular topic thread you chose to announce your more restrictive OGC policy. That's not a slam, just an observation.

Okay.

 

[Nellisir]

True20 is our Trademark, we have established terms under which we will agree to its use by third parties. Our Open Game Content (and your use of it) is handled in exactly the same way as any of our other releases.

For the record, I think your handling of the True20 trademark is reasonable. It's a challenge - writer prove thyself.

Also, your handling of OGC (my opinion sealed by last night's purchase of SpirosBlaak and Thieves World) is incredibly generous. I heart Green Ronin. My wallet hearts Green Ronin. I might even send a card.


Nell.

Hey, I got one thousand, thirteen posts!

 

[Morrus]

But publishers that believe restricting, locking up, and obfuscating their OGC to preserve "their" market are ultimately relying on two negative assumptions - 1) that most customers are ignorant about OGC, and 2) that those who aren't ignorant about OGC don't assign it any value. Those assumptions are probably correct, for now. But I wouldn't bet on them forever, particularly if your market is the online segment of D&D players, who are more informed and more networked than any other segment.

Both assumptions are, as you say, correct. Very much so. I disagree with your conclusion, though - I don't see it changing.

 

[Orcus]

OK then, if you buy open content you better have bought the original Tome of Horrors. Not only is it totally open, but we even put instructions on how to reuse the content right there in the book!

I'm coming to your house to see if you have it, a copy of this thread in hand.

Clark