You reap what you sow - GSL.

[Gilwen]

Deal. Just as long as you don't burn any of us at the stake for lack of puritanism or shoot us with one of those guns that are mandatory for everyone over 8 years of age!

LMAO! we lowered the age to 6, first grade is getting rough! But we did take away the matches because there were just to many charred remains lying around.

Gil

 

[pemerton]

What!? When did that happen?

The date of Australian independence is a little hard to pin down, but it happened sometime between 1919 (when Australia became a distinct party to the Treaty of Versailles and the League of Nations, although (a bit like Rain of Blows) with a somewhat ambiguous indent under Great Britain's signature) and 1942 (when Australia adopted the Statute of Westminster in order to validate certain wartime shipping legislation).

Australia is a constitutional monarchy, and there is a personal union of the thrones of Australia and the United Kingdom (and, given that the two nations have common laws of succession, this personal union is likely to endure for a while at least). The transition from constitutional union of the thrones to a personal union is again hard to pin down - but it was clearly a constitutional union in 1924 (after the Imperial conference at which it was agreed that no change in the laws of succession could be made without the agreement of the UK and the Dominions, which included Australia) and was undoubtedly rendered a purely personal union by the Australia Acts of 1986.

For reasons that I don't personally understand, Australia tends to adopt the British forms and titles (eg we refer to the Queen as Elizabeth II even though she is the first Elizabeth to be Queen of Australia).

 

[Fifth Element]

Australia is a constitutional monarchy

As is Canada. The British monarch is technically the head of state. We've been meaning to mention something about that for the past 100 years or so, but the right time hasn't come up.

 

[Gilwen]

I was just kidding with my earlier comment. I had a smiley and everything.

 

[pemerton]

I was just kidding with my earlier comment. I had a smiley and everything.

I know. I just wanted an excuse to complain about the Australian use of British forms and titles, which is a pet peeve of mine!

 

[Gilwen]

I know. I just wanted an excuse to complain about the Australian use of British forms and titles, which is a pet peeve of mine!

I did enjoy reading about it!

Gil

 

[Treebore]

I do believe that he is, yes, as well as being a successful d20/OGL publisher. Treebore, OTOH, is neither.

Yep. I am neither. Clark isn't a Copyright lawyer either. At least I did my own research. Maybe you guys should too? That way you might be as aware of certain points of copyright law as I am. Not to mention international law.

So I am an intelligent guy who researched copyright law on his own and e-mailed a few legal law professors for some specific answers, who isn't a lawyer, and isn't a game publisher.

So if you really want to know research it. Clark is a criminal law lawyer, and he has never said he researched copyright law to find out the specifics. So he is far from giving any legal advice. Just ask him, he'll tell you.

So if you really want to know research it yourself. Ask lawyers who claim to know copyright law. e-mail professors who have written up articles and taught courses on copyright law. They are surprisingly willing to converse.

Trying to belittle and discredit me changes nothing. You want to know? Find out for yourself.

 

[CountPopeula]

Without getting into a whole lot of stuff that's gone on in this thread, I fail to see what the GSL really offers. Say I write an adventure. I can give the names of the monsters in the MM, and even then, not the cool ones (drow, beholders, mind flayers, warforged, shadar-kai).

IF I wanted to say "This room has 4 orcs and 2 zombies in it" a bunch of times, do I need the GSL?

I can't say I blame Hasbro for wanting to be closed with everything, although I don't see what value they get out of it, either. I mean, if I'm going to put out a product with Hasbro's trade dress that says "Dungeons and Dragons" right on it, and it would be better if it had things like monster statistics and abilities printed in it, well, who really looks bad? If the goal of 4E is to attract the non-gaming, manga, anne rice, and ultimate marvel crowd... won't disappointing 3pp reflect poorly on Hasbro and their IP? Under the OGL, if Mongoose or Malhavoc put out a bad product (and I'm just picking on them because they popped into my head after reading all this, I don't mean any slight), then it reflects poorly on them. If said bad product has "dungeons & dragons" on the cover and is internally visually identical to Hasbro 1st party products... that reflects poorly on the brand as a whole.

 

[pemerton]

Treebore, I am not an IP lawyer. I teach Equity and Trusts, and am an expert in certain aspects of Australia federal criminal law and criminal procedure.

Nevertheless, I trust my own intutions, and Clark's, more than yours, mostly because (i) your assertion that it is not hard is wrong (it is hard) and (ii) you haven't really said much to substanitate your claims.

 

[Treebore]

Treebore, I am not an IP lawyer. I teach Equity and Trusts, and am an expert in certain aspects of Australia federal criminal law and criminal procedure.

Nevertheless, I trust my own intutions, and Clark's, more than yours, mostly because (i) your assertion that it is not hard is wrong (it is hard) and (ii) you haven't really said much to substanitate your claims.

Thats fine. But it isn't hard. I know, because I searched. Try it some time. Start with colleges and universities.