Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="PJ-Mason" data-source="post: 2478079" data-attributes="member: 12285">When was i? If ALL they were doing is releasing OGC, i wouldn't have said a darn thing. But this license and their OGC is darn well linked and i think to say otherwise is shading the issue.Nice. Self-defeating? Maybe self-deluding. But not in the way that you think, i'm sure. If i'm missing the point, i have plenty of company.You're missing my point. Intentionally or not, i can't tell. Maybe i'm not being clear, which is very possible. I am not saying they are forcing, aggresively anyway, anyone to do anything. I know it, you know it, and everybody reading this thread knows it. But it just ain't that simple. By creating a license so that people can use their OGC "officially" it is an obvious attempt to control the use of their material. Anyone not using their TrueD20/Spycraft/Mcdonalds trademark is going to be out in the cold if they don't use the trademark and submit to X companies censorship. I know it, you know it, and everybody reading this thread knows it. THATS why i think this thread was started, to see if people thought it was cool to side step the trademark and how it might even be done and maintain some sort of fuzzy feeling. Which, at this point, i think is apparently entirely uneeded. At first i thought, heck no that ain't right. Now i'm thinking, hey if they aren't playing by the spirit of the OGL, only the letter of it, why the heck should i? If its about business and grabbing onto everything you can, then don't you dare claim foul when i do the same thing. Ya know?I don't happen to think that is cool or in any represents what the OGC community could or should be about. I don't know if i believe its Elitsim, or greed, or what the heck now. I just know that i think its ugly. So i am saying so. You have every right to think i'm wrong of course, just don't expect me to agree.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> At least when WOTC released their trademark for use, the only stipulation (that i could see)was that they didn't get left out in the cold (Ie, you needed to help them sell core books). Even then you could use the OGL and actually leave them out in the cold (you can debate how cold that is of course. I doubt WOTC gives much a care what any of us do business wise. No one else is in their league).</blockquote>

Verification