I can publish a 4E version of a 3E class that is not currently in a WotC product providing that I withdraw said class from the market if and when WotC makes thier own conversion.
In other words: Can I publish a 4E version of the Monk or Psion class under the GSL as long as I stop distributing it when these classes are released by Wizards?
You publish your terrific idea of XYZ class, players really like it so your sales go up. Then WotC sees the popularity and decides, 'Let's make XYZ class!' and steals your market because you're no longer allowed to publish it.
I'm not sure, but if that's true, that's brilliant from a business standpoint.
You publish your terrific idea of XYZ class, players really like it so your sales go up. Then WotC sees the popularity and decides, 'Let's make XYZ class!' and steals your market because you're no longer allowed to publish it.
And gives WotC a kick in the butt to make books faster.
If that is the case, then plan for it and expect it. Figure out a way to exit in the green when WotC publishes, and you will have accomplished something. Instead of thinking of your institution as an ongoing publishing company, think of it as a business venture to raise capital for your future use. If you don't have any products to suitably replace its market share, close up shop and exit in the green - it's all gravy since you didn't expect it to last anyway. Although I would suggest using said class book to build up other products just as strong, so that you have a frigate ready when WotC takes your flagship away.
The publishing business is probably one of the worst businesses to plan to exit in the green. Just printing a book is hazardous because you have to set a certain number of copies. Sure, a smaller print run is easier to sell out, and if it's popular you can then print second and third editions. But at some point you'll have more supply then demand and will have to take a loss (because printers always want their money up front ;)).
For the non-lawyer thoughts:
WotC cannot steal your IP and print it themselves. Knowing that they will eventually do Monk and Psion, I would suggest being proactive in your product and call it something else but keep the tech and the powers the same. They cannot prevent you from printing your unique IP.
Secondly, part of my plan in doing up the Monk or Psion in 4E is to cash in on popular classes before WotC gets them out.
What I believe it means is this: If there is a 3.x or earlier edition version still in production by your company when your 4e version comes out you must stop production of that product, and sell off what stock you have left from the earlier edition product.
I could be wrong, but this seems more likely. The older version is not obsolete, just no longer in production.
No offense to the people giving anonymous, free legal advice over the internet, but I would really suggest at least a brief consultation with an actual lawyer. The internet abounds with both heavily cynical and wildly optimistic interpretations of the GSL, and there is no way to really know if anyone's interpretation is credible. If you think you are heading into a situation with meaningful risk, talk to a lawyer. If you think you'll be working on a very small scale, talk to a cheap lawyer.
Look, I find replies like this exceedingly unhelpful. Honestly, if any of us here could afford to consult a lawyer, we wouldn't be asking laymen their opinions. I for one am tired of seeing posts like this on the GSL boards. If you want to preface a useful comment or your own opinions or interpretations of the issues in question by saying "I'm no lawyer, but I think..." that's fine. But as far as I'm concerned, you going through the threads looking for every opportunity to shove "TALK TO A REAL LAWYER" in peoples' faces is pure SPAM.
Look, I find replies like this exceedingly unhelpful. Honestly, if any of us here could afford to consult a lawyer, we wouldn't be asking laymen their opinions. I for one am tired of seeing posts like this on the GSL boards. If you want to preface a useful comment or your own opinions or interpretations of the issues in question by saying "I'm no lawyer, but I think..." that's fine. But as far as I'm concerned, you going through the threads looking for every opportunity to shove "TALK TO A REAL LAWYER" in peoples' faces is pure SPAM.
Actually, it is really, really good advice. It *IS* that simple. Lambasting people for the very real, very good, advice of seeking out an attorney is uncalled for.
Legal issues can be needlessly complex, they can also be relatively straightforward. It depends on the EXACT question you are asking which is what a face to face or telephone conversation with a "real" lawyer will help determine. When it come to legal contracts, the exact definitions of the terms used in the contract become very important. Your question might SOUND related to someone else's on a message board but actually be very different.
If you take the time to read the license(s) carefully and make sure all parties are clear on the definitions of all the terms used, and you feel you understand everything clearly, you are probably okay. Depending upon your background, this can take a considerable amount of time. I have a Ph.D. and have 3 patents to my name. I have also helped write or file 11 additional patents. This said, when the GSL came out, I consulted a lawyer. The truth is, he charged me a bottle of single-malt scotch ($90, but I considered this cheap). I do know that there are legal organizations that can and will help you for minimal fees.
It really, REALLY depends on EXACTLY what your question is and how it relates to all of the clauses of a particular license.
The main problem that some publishers have with the GSL right now is that a number of terms are not clearly defined. Your question falls into one of those areas where the terms are not clearly defined, which suggests that the first thing a lawyer will tell you to do is to get clarification of certain terms from WotC. This is why a number of people are eagerly awaiting the "revision" to the GSL.
Personally, I would just wait for the updated GSL whenever that happens to come out and hope that answers your questions.
Flaming people telling you to talk to a lawyer, probably unwise.
Patrick
Look, I find replies like this exceedingly unhelpful. Honestly, if any of us here could afford to consult a lawyer, we wouldn't be asking laymen their opinions. I for one am tired of seeing posts like this on the GSL boards. If you want to preface a useful comment or your own opinions or interpretations of the issues in question by saying "I'm no lawyer, but I think..." that's fine. But as far as I'm concerned, you going through the threads looking for every opportunity to shove "TALK TO A REAL LAWYER" in peoples' faces is pure SPAM.
Taking bad legal advice can be financially damaging- I have learned this from personal experience. I didn't call anyone names or disparage anyone's ideas in my post, except perhaps by generally being skeptical toward free legal advice over the internet. Based on my past experiences, the advice I'm giving is, IMO, the best advice out there. If someone wants to make money in whatever field, he or she should consult a lawyer about anything that isn't crystal clear. If he or she can't afford it, then it's best not to take the risk. Not hiring a lawyer today can mean you *must* hire one tomorrow, possibly after investing in something.