WotC to Revise D&D 4th Edition GSL and SRD

[Raven Crowking]

It'll take more than an announcement that the GSL is going to be revised in some unspecified way at an unspecified future date to achieve that.

Especially if the "we can change the GSL whenever we like without informing you or giving you a period to rectify any breaches of the new terms" clauses are still in, since it could otherwise be the world's most generous licence and the conspiracy theorists could still argue it was just a means of sucking 3rd parties into the GSL in order to destroy them.

Cautiously optimistic, but amethal has pinged the "big bad" of the GSL right there. "I am altering the licence. Pray I do not alter it further."

The GSL changes, to be a win, would have to strike this clause, and would have to strike the OGL/GSL restriction to some degree. I understand that the OGL/GSL restriction is probably intended to prevent 4e from getting hooked into the OGL, but there has to be some better way to go about it.

Personally, I think we should keep pushing until they decide to simply make 4e OGL.


RC

 

[Doug McCrae]

Goodman Games and Mongoose are already in.

Pazio is committed to 3.75, so they're out no matter what.

Green Ronin is off doing non-D&D material.

Basically, IMO, we are left with the Wizards changing the GSL for Necro, and only for Necro.

Yeah, that's exactly what I was thinking, this is all about Necromancer Games. Green Ronin was moving away from D&D long before 4e. I don't see Paizo dropping their Pathfinder rpg though maybe they will publish 4e compatible modules if the GSL changes.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

WoTC cleverly chose an acronym with no 'S' in it just to avoid such defacement. There is a reason they are not Sorcerers of The Sound.

Because people would call them SOTS...



If indeed Clark is the primary driver of these changes (and I believe that he is the "primary" catalyst) then I am at best "cautiously optimistic."

If there is a scale of "GSL Acceptability," where a "1" is the current GSL and a "10" is the OGL, then I think it is fair to say that Clark is closer to the "1" than, for example, Chris Pramas.

This is not intended to be a knock on Clark. I think Clark has made it clear-- speaking as a lawyer at times-- that his bar of acceptable contractual restrictions is lower than others'.

So while WotC may be opening the GSL enough to let Clark slip through, that's no guarantee that the floodgates are going to be wide open.

 

[lmpjr007]

I agree. I think it is clear to anyone that, intentions aside, the GSL as it is now has completely failed to achieve its goals. People dont like failure. So we have revision.

I am sorry but being a 3rd party publisher, I am even MORE skeptic to the GSL. WOTC could have done this from the beginning, but they didn't because they thought they did not have to make the GSL 3PP friendly. But now since they have lost just about all the major 3rd party publishers support for 4th edition, now WOTC feels it is time to "do the right thing” and support 3PP with a “new” GSL. This is just another misstep in the whole release in 4th edition from WOTC. I have to wonder, how long 3PP are going to have to wait to see this new revised GSL? Maybe six months to a year. I don't know too many companies that can wait that long (who have already waited a year to release 4th Edition) just to see this new license.

 

[dmccoy1693]

No company is going to admit that their own product is not selling well. To do so is suicide for the product line. Companies will tell people how well their product is doing right up until the week before the product is canceled. You cannot take the self professed success of a product or line at face value from any company.

Like it or not, this is true. Warhammer Dark Hersey preorder sales were doing great. 3 days after the regular edition was released, the company said they are no longer producing DH material. Same with Shadowrun.

 

[El Mahdi]

Yes, do avoid being too melodramatic, because there's a risk of losing perspective. Whatever may have been said here, the posters of EN World are a small percentage of the customer base. Whatever was said in the statement, I strongly suspect the opinions of colleagues (like Necromancer Games) had a whole lot more to do with this than those of us who only play and consume.

Yet Linea felt it important enough to stress "community" and the health of the "hobby gaming lifestyle". Sounds like it was straight from the Ladies' mouth.

However, Small Percentage: you are absolutely correct - Opinions That Matter: Undeniably Yes.

 

[Carnivorous_Bean]

While I agree that simply using the GSL to vilify WotC is pointless, on the other hand, it's objectively true that it would be unwise for a third party to sign a contract which can be changed or voided at any time, but which is still binding on all parties, and requires the destruction of all materials published under the original contract which do not meet the new specifications, and the inability to publish them in any other form (effectively putting your IP at their mercy, as well as your stock).

To assume malice on WotC's part is ludicrous. However, to assume unconditional benevolence their part would be even more ludicrous, because at least assuming malice puts you on your guard, while assuming unconditional benevolence is effectively kneeling and baring your financial neck to them, assuming that they'd never be mean enough to use the enormous axe in their hands on it.

It's a big mistake to put unconditional trust in people as a basis for business. It's also a mistake that honest people make frequently, because they assume that other people are honest too, until they get burned -- and I speak from experience here, as one of those scorched by excessive trust in other people's purity of motives where money is concerned.

So, I'd just like to remind the 3rd party publishers not to be too eager to rush in just because WotC has made a few noises about changing the GSL, and remind them of an apt quote ....

"Ha, ha! What a fool Honesty is! And Trust, his sworn brother, a very simple gentleman ..." --Shakespeare, A Winter's Tale

 

[Fifth Element]

Opener actually is a word. But it doesn't mean more open.

Yes, I believe the question is "is opener an adjective?"

Opener, as in can opener or season opener (sports), is a noun.

 

[El Mahdi]

Thanks, Delta and grickherder.

 

[Fifth Element]

it's objectively true that it would be unwise for a third party to sign a contract which can be changed or voided at any time, but which is still binding on all parties, and requires the destruction of all materials published under the original contract which do not meet the new specifications, and the inability to publish them in any other form (effectively putting your IP at their mercy, as well as your stock).

Really? What about those few publishers who were going to use the original GSL, then. Did they make objectively bad decisions?

(I'm assuming all the terms you specified above are in the GSL. I don't know it well enough to say.)