<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: More OGL follies in the run-up to D&#038;D 4th Edition</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ogrecave.com/2008/01/08/more-ogl-follies-in-the-run-up-to-dd-4th-edition/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ogrecave.com/2008/01/08/more-ogl-follies-in-the-run-up-to-dd-4th-edition/</link>
	<description>Unplugged gaming news and views</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 12:44:13 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Baron</title>
		<link>http://ogrecave.com/2008/01/08/more-ogl-follies-in-the-run-up-to-dd-4th-edition/#comment-4303</link>
		<dc:creator>Baron</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Jun 2008 16:21:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ogrecave.com/2008/01/08/more-ogl-follies-in-the-run-up-to-dd-4th-edition/#comment-4303</guid>
		<description>Well, personally I wish WoTC would cancel the OGL all together, I am sickened by the flood of books that came out with that OGL/d20STL with 3.0, I want less books and PDF crap out than ever before.  It all just convilutes and distorts everything, let DnD be DnD and you go make a game and publish it under your own rules systems, why use d20 for everything, its nutts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, personally I wish WoTC would cancel the OGL all together, I am sickened by the flood of books that came out with that OGL/d20STL with 3.0, I want less books and PDF crap out than ever before.  It all just convilutes and distorts everything, let DnD be DnD and you go make a game and publish it under your own rules systems, why use d20 for everything, its nutts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dai Oni</title>
		<link>http://ogrecave.com/2008/01/08/more-ogl-follies-in-the-run-up-to-dd-4th-edition/#comment-3464</link>
		<dc:creator>Dai Oni</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2008 08:25:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ogrecave.com/2008/01/08/more-ogl-follies-in-the-run-up-to-dd-4th-edition/#comment-3464</guid>
		<description>OBTW, they're not calling the new license OGL. It's &lt;b&gt;Game System License&lt;/b&gt; (GSL).

I have a sinking feeling that what is legally defined as Open Game Content (or OGC) in the current OGLv1 will have a different legal term in the new GSL. If that is true, then by that technicality we can't use 4e "open" material with OGLv1 and vice versa (can't use 3e OGC with GSL).

Pray that I'm wrong.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>OBTW, they&#8217;re not calling the new license OGL. It&#8217;s <b>Game System License</b> (GSL).</p>
<p>I have a sinking feeling that what is legally defined as Open Game Content (or OGC) in the current OGLv1 will have a different legal term in the new GSL. If that is true, then by that technicality we can&#8217;t use 4e &#8220;open&#8221; material with OGLv1 and vice versa (can&#8217;t use 3e OGC with GSL).</p>
<p>Pray that I&#8217;m wrong.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dai Oni</title>
		<link>http://ogrecave.com/2008/01/08/more-ogl-follies-in-the-run-up-to-dd-4th-edition/#comment-3446</link>
		<dc:creator>Dai Oni</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Jan 2008 23:28:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ogrecave.com/2008/01/08/more-ogl-follies-in-the-run-up-to-dd-4th-edition/#comment-3446</guid>
		<description>"I think you are truly mistaken. You can get around many concepts by rewriting them and not using exact words. But attempting to make a system that does essentially the exact same thing, the same way, but using different words is still Copyright infringement and violates the OGL. Example, changing Experience point awards to role playing point awards is a violation of the OGL." --&lt;b&gt;AndrewJ&lt;/b&gt;

Actually, that would be a violation of the &lt;i&gt;d20 System&lt;/i&gt; Trademark License. If you want to introduce a new experience award system, a modified concept of the existing version, you'll need to express it in your own words, under the OGLv1, not the &lt;i&gt;d20&lt;/i&gt;STL.

Having a compatibility label or not is up to the publisher or designer, just like having third-party companies to make [fashion fad] accessories for Apple iPod, even automakers are designing their cars' interior around that famous MP3 player. (Blech!) Or trying to get NFL and Patriot licensing to make Patriots/Super Bowl gears. It's all about business.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;I think you are truly mistaken. You can get around many concepts by rewriting them and not using exact words. But attempting to make a system that does essentially the exact same thing, the same way, but using different words is still Copyright infringement and violates the OGL. Example, changing Experience point awards to role playing point awards is a violation of the OGL.&#8221; &#8211;<b>AndrewJ</b></p>
<p>Actually, that would be a violation of the <i>d20 System</i> Trademark License. If you want to introduce a new experience award system, a modified concept of the existing version, you&#8217;ll need to express it in your own words, under the OGLv1, not the <i>d20</i>STL.</p>
<p>Having a compatibility label or not is up to the publisher or designer, just like having third-party companies to make [fashion fad] accessories for Apple iPod, even automakers are designing their cars&#8217; interior around that famous MP3 player. (Blech!) Or trying to get NFL and Patriot licensing to make Patriots/Super Bowl gears. It&#8217;s all about business.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: AndrewJ</title>
		<link>http://ogrecave.com/2008/01/08/more-ogl-follies-in-the-run-up-to-dd-4th-edition/#comment-3435</link>
		<dc:creator>AndrewJ</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Jan 2008 18:16:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ogrecave.com/2008/01/08/more-ogl-follies-in-the-run-up-to-dd-4th-edition/#comment-3435</guid>
		<description>"They can’t. All they can do is watch if you copied their words from their books. Concept cannot be copyrighted. Words can” Dai Oni

I think you are truly mistaken. You can get around many concepts by rewriting them and  not using exact words. But attempting to make a system that does essentially the exact same thing, the same way, but using different words is still Copyright infringement and violates the OGL. Example, changing Experience point awards to role playing point awards is a violation of the OGL. 

Regardless compatible content has been around a long long time. It is easier to ignore the OGL and do what I said above and leave any reference to compatabilty off of a document and claim it as a generic roleplaying supplement. Does it hurt not to have the OGL or D20 stamp on your product...yeap. But it also gives you a bit more freedom. I expect anyone trying to make a living at publishing OGL product has the $5000.00 investment needed. The rest of us can simply publish something generic and update it once the SRD and OGL are free in 2009. 

WOTC opened a huge market with the OGL as many writers realized dreams of being published if only in PDF format. It also gave many settings the ability to prosper because of it. Before OGL D&#38;D was the 800lb gorilla, it still is. However there are many more genre's, campaign settings, and adventures than existed from the entire period that dirst and second edition existed. The new changes are not going to stop writers. Worlds that nearly died like 7th sea got new life from the OGL and are now just not going to die. The market for RPG material is not lucrative for all but a few....but it is large thanks to PDF, places like RPGNOW and WOTC. 
So less worry and more stuff for me to play with please.( I myself suck at writing new material and LOVE all the options made available.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;They can’t. All they can do is watch if you copied their words from their books. Concept cannot be copyrighted. Words can” Dai Oni</p>
<p>I think you are truly mistaken. You can get around many concepts by rewriting them and  not using exact words. But attempting to make a system that does essentially the exact same thing, the same way, but using different words is still Copyright infringement and violates the OGL. Example, changing Experience point awards to role playing point awards is a violation of the OGL. </p>
<p>Regardless compatible content has been around a long long time. It is easier to ignore the OGL and do what I said above and leave any reference to compatabilty off of a document and claim it as a generic roleplaying supplement. Does it hurt not to have the OGL or D20 stamp on your product&#8230;yeap. But it also gives you a bit more freedom. I expect anyone trying to make a living at publishing OGL product has the $5000.00 investment needed. The rest of us can simply publish something generic and update it once the SRD and OGL are free in 2009. </p>
<p>WOTC opened a huge market with the OGL as many writers realized dreams of being published if only in PDF format. It also gave many settings the ability to prosper because of it. Before OGL D&amp;D was the 800lb gorilla, it still is. However there are many more genre&#8217;s, campaign settings, and adventures than existed from the entire period that dirst and second edition existed. The new changes are not going to stop writers. Worlds that nearly died like 7th sea got new life from the OGL and are now just not going to die. The market for RPG material is not lucrative for all but a few&#8230;.but it is large thanks to PDF, places like RPGNOW and WOTC.<br />
So less worry and more stuff for me to play with please.( I myself suck at writing new material and LOVE all the options made available.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dai Oni</title>
		<link>http://ogrecave.com/2008/01/08/more-ogl-follies-in-the-run-up-to-dd-4th-edition/#comment-3430</link>
		<dc:creator>Dai Oni</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2008 08:08:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ogrecave.com/2008/01/08/more-ogl-follies-in-the-run-up-to-dd-4th-edition/#comment-3430</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;"Hmmm, IIRC. WotC didn’t seem too precious about lifting the Call of Cthulhu Sanity Mechanic for Unearthed Arcana."&lt;/i&gt; --&lt;b&gt;PoC&lt;/b&gt;

If you're referring to the &lt;i&gt;Call of Cthulhu d20&lt;/i&gt; written by Monte Cook and John Tyne, it seems they have every right, sans anything specifically related to &lt;i&gt;CoC&lt;/i&gt; intellectual properties (owned by Chaosium, not the Public Domain Lovecraft's works).

The same goes for lifting the VP/WP health system mechanics from their &lt;i&gt;Star Wars d20&lt;/i&gt; rulebooks.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>&#8220;Hmmm, IIRC. WotC didn’t seem too precious about lifting the Call of Cthulhu Sanity Mechanic for Unearthed Arcana.&#8221;</i> &#8211;<b>PoC</b></p>
<p>If you&#8217;re referring to the <i>Call of Cthulhu d20</i> written by Monte Cook and John Tyne, it seems they have every right, sans anything specifically related to <i>CoC</i> intellectual properties (owned by Chaosium, not the Public Domain Lovecraft&#8217;s works).</p>
<p>The same goes for lifting the VP/WP health system mechanics from their <i>Star Wars d20</i> rulebooks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dai Oni</title>
		<link>http://ogrecave.com/2008/01/08/more-ogl-follies-in-the-run-up-to-dd-4th-edition/#comment-3429</link>
		<dc:creator>Dai Oni</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2008 08:02:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ogrecave.com/2008/01/08/more-ogl-follies-in-the-run-up-to-dd-4th-edition/#comment-3429</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;"And yet, did not release the Rules Compendium in PDF, a book that makes perfect sense to buy in PDF right now."&lt;/i&gt; --&lt;b&gt;Dave&lt;/b&gt;

It will. The print was just released late last year. Give it time.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>&#8220;And yet, did not release the Rules Compendium in PDF, a book that makes perfect sense to buy in PDF right now.&#8221;</i> &#8211;<b>Dave</b></p>
<p>It will. The print was just released late last year. Give it time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: PoC</title>
		<link>http://ogrecave.com/2008/01/08/more-ogl-follies-in-the-run-up-to-dd-4th-edition/#comment-3413</link>
		<dc:creator>PoC</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Jan 2008 18:54:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ogrecave.com/2008/01/08/more-ogl-follies-in-the-run-up-to-dd-4th-edition/#comment-3413</guid>
		<description>"They can’t. All they can do is watch if you copied their words from their books. Concept cannot be copyrighted. Words can"  Dai Oni

Hmmm, IIRC. WotC didn't seem too precious about lifting the Call of Cthulhu Sanity Mechanic for Unearthed Arcana.

It does appear that D&#38;D 4th edition will have more of an online (not totally, just more), so maybe they actually will have big fly swatters for unsanctioned online releases. I wonder what the implications will be for ENWorld with both this and Gleemax/DDI?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;They can’t. All they can do is watch if you copied their words from their books. Concept cannot be copyrighted. Words can&#8221;  Dai Oni</p>
<p>Hmmm, IIRC. WotC didn&#8217;t seem too precious about lifting the Call of Cthulhu Sanity Mechanic for Unearthed Arcana.</p>
<p>It does appear that D&amp;D 4th edition will have more of an online (not totally, just more), so maybe they actually will have big fly swatters for unsanctioned online releases. I wonder what the implications will be for ENWorld with both this and Gleemax/DDI?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave</title>
		<link>http://ogrecave.com/2008/01/08/more-ogl-follies-in-the-run-up-to-dd-4th-edition/#comment-3412</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Jan 2008 17:15:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ogrecave.com/2008/01/08/more-ogl-follies-in-the-run-up-to-dd-4th-edition/#comment-3412</guid>
		<description>"WotC has, just recently, flooded RPGNOW with tons of their 3.0 and 3.5 edition titles to scrape together the last big of that edition’s revenues before it becomes chaff."

And yet, did not release the Rules Compendium in PDF, a book that makes perfect sense to buy in PDF right now.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;WotC has, just recently, flooded RPGNOW with tons of their 3.0 and 3.5 edition titles to scrape together the last big of that edition’s revenues before it becomes chaff.&#8221;</p>
<p>And yet, did not release the Rules Compendium in PDF, a book that makes perfect sense to buy in PDF right now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bob Slaughter</title>
		<link>http://ogrecave.com/2008/01/08/more-ogl-follies-in-the-run-up-to-dd-4th-edition/#comment-3410</link>
		<dc:creator>Bob Slaughter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Jan 2008 01:31:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ogrecave.com/2008/01/08/more-ogl-follies-in-the-run-up-to-dd-4th-edition/#comment-3410</guid>
		<description>James M said:
"Everyone else will be able to get a copy of the SRD on June 6, 2008… but remember, the SRD does not contain any rules, merely the guidelines for how to use the rules in the books, which will be available (apparently) the day the SRD releases. However, those who get the SRD for free will NOT be able to publish anything before January 1, 2009, [snip]

However… one thing that WotC has not counted on, as far as it seems, is the online fanbase, who will not wait until January 1, 2009 to start putting their own 4E D&#38;D projects online for FREE."

Um, last time I checked, "putting project online" WAS "published", free or not. And I suspect WotC would be willing to file Cease and Desist orders to have it pulled. Suing for damages from free products would be pointless, but shutting down webistes wouldn't be.

Oh, and that would suck about as bad as Vogon poetry.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>James M said:<br />
&#8220;Everyone else will be able to get a copy of the SRD on June 6, 2008… but remember, the SRD does not contain any rules, merely the guidelines for how to use the rules in the books, which will be available (apparently) the day the SRD releases. However, those who get the SRD for free will NOT be able to publish anything before January 1, 2009, [snip]</p>
<p>However… one thing that WotC has not counted on, as far as it seems, is the online fanbase, who will not wait until January 1, 2009 to start putting their own 4E D&amp;D projects online for FREE.&#8221;</p>
<p>Um, last time I checked, &#8220;putting project online&#8221; WAS &#8220;published&#8221;, free or not. And I suspect WotC would be willing to file Cease and Desist orders to have it pulled. Suing for damages from free products would be pointless, but shutting down webistes wouldn&#8217;t be.</p>
<p>Oh, and that would suck about as bad as Vogon poetry.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lee Valentine</title>
		<link>http://ogrecave.com/2008/01/08/more-ogl-follies-in-the-run-up-to-dd-4th-edition/#comment-3409</link>
		<dc:creator>Lee Valentine</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2008 19:04:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ogrecave.com/2008/01/08/more-ogl-follies-in-the-run-up-to-dd-4th-edition/#comment-3409</guid>
		<description>Mike, I don't know what to say about PDFs.  WotC clearly sees a development path there, as that's their intended publication for Dragon/Dungeon/Gleemax.  I don't know if they are trying to gain a competitive edge in the PDF arena, or if they have just decided to limit the field to the big players so that the market isn't filled with stuff from any John Doe.  

PDFs are not invisible to the people who publish them and get decent sales.  Mongoose, for example, reports a good revenue stream from their PDFs, even the high ticket price ones, for example.

WotC has, just recently, flooded RPGNOW with tons of their 3.0 and 3.5 edition titles to scrape together the last big of that edition's revenues before it becomes chaff.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mike, I don&#8217;t know what to say about PDFs.  WotC clearly sees a development path there, as that&#8217;s their intended publication for Dragon/Dungeon/Gleemax.  I don&#8217;t know if they are trying to gain a competitive edge in the PDF arena, or if they have just decided to limit the field to the big players so that the market isn&#8217;t filled with stuff from any John Doe.  </p>
<p>PDFs are not invisible to the people who publish them and get decent sales.  Mongoose, for example, reports a good revenue stream from their PDFs, even the high ticket price ones, for example.</p>
<p>WotC has, just recently, flooded RPGNOW with tons of their 3.0 and 3.5 edition titles to scrape together the last big of that edition&#8217;s revenues before it becomes chaff.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
