Publishing a Setting - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Publishing a Setting

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
brambuldon
Jan 25, 2009 15:17:21 Hi,
I'm currently working on a website to show the setting I've developed. It was originally designed for 3E but with the release of 4E, it has been converted over and I hope to put the stuff live soon. The website itself will be purely related to the world, while anything actually related to 4E/D&D will be in a free downloadable pdf.

Now, the GSL stats no websites, but I assume the its in relation D&D related content, such as stats and rules sets, and that I can put info up such as maps and descriptions of the cities and places. Am I correct in this assumption?

I am just an individual (in relation to the GLS), and if this pans out, maybe expanding into actually publishing. I just want to cover my bases in the case of future expansion.
#2
fatumd20
Jan 26, 2009 9:56:39 To start, I am not a lawyer.

With that out of the way, the GSL is concerned with tech/rules only. You can published your own IP (maps, descriptions, flavor, etc) as much as you want on your website. Just make sure that there are zero rules and tech on the website for now until the release the info on website GSL stuff.
#3
brambuldon
Jan 27, 2009 10:49:29 On another note,
I see that some companies are publishing material without the GSL, but still within copyright laws. As an individual, on the small scale, would it be wise to sign the GSL?
It appears that several companies, such as Green Ronin and Adamant, are doing fine without the GSL.
I see that the advantage of being without the GSL is that I can 'redefine' terms and established stuff (my Rakshasa are more like the hindu rakshasa, and aren't catlike at all, as established in the MM). But the advantage of signing is I'd actually be able to use the logo and could see added benefits from Wizards.
Thoughts?
#4
crenshaw13
Jan 27, 2009 11:28:52
On another note,
I see that some companies are publishing material without the GSL, but still within copyright laws. As an individual, on the small scale, would it be wise to sign the GSL?
It appears that several companies, such as Green Ronin and Adamant, are doing fine without the GSL.
I see that the advantage of being without the GSL is that I can 'redefine' terms and established stuff (my Rakshasa are more like the hindu rakshasa, and aren't catlike at all, as established in the MM). But the advantage of signing is I'd actually be able to use the logo and could see added benefits from Wizards.
Thoughts?

(Yes, yes, consult a lawyer first, we got it.)

As a small publisher, I have no trouble going with the GSL. It's pretty open ended and forgiving as long as you are sticking to "pure" D&D 4e. I don't plan on creating entire new RPGs based on 4e, nor vast "Dark Sun-esque" settings that require one to alter the core stuff.

Your Hindu Rakshasa only needs a name change and a change to one or two details and it's a new monster, and well within the GSL guidelines. (I'd personally stay away from the word "hindu" - but I get what you mean).

The large publishers likely had long-term plans that got spoiled once the GSL was released, and they had to make business decisions to not go with it. Those decisions were not necessarily right or wrong, they were business decisions that (I assume) weighed benefits and risks. They also have the benefit of name recognition which you may not have. I certainly do not.

For me, there is very little benefit with not going the GSL route, and very little risk by going with it. That's my business decision.

Is the GSL perfect? Nope. It's one-sided. But it's also letting me license a powerful name for free and without royalty. That's huge for me. Financially, a royalty-free licensing capability is worth not having 100% of the typical licensing rights. Again, that's my business decision.

So, the real question is, what's better for your business?

Good luck!
#5
fatumd20
Jan 27, 2009 12:43:14 I would have to agree with Crenshaw13. I am a small time publisher myself and I found no reason why I can't/shouldn't use the GSL. I find it reasonable (and I know I'm in the minority on that).

By not using the GSL, you are skirting a thin line that, as a small publisher, carries a huge risk if something doesn't go your way. By using the GSL, you have more options without the huge risk. Win/Win in my book.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 brambuldon Jan 25, 2009 15:17:21	Hi, I'm currently working on a website to show the setting I've developed. It was originally designed for 3E but with the release of 4E, it has been converted over and I hope to put the stuff live soon. The website itself will be purely related to the world, while anything actually related to 4E/D&D will be in a free downloadable pdf. Now, the GSL stats no websites, but I assume the its in relation D&D related content, such as stats and rules sets, and that I can put info up such as maps and descriptions of the cities and places. Am I correct in this assumption? I am just an individual (in relation to the GLS), and if this pans out, maybe expanding into actually publishing. I just want to cover my bases in the case of future expansion.
#2 fatumd20 Jan 26, 2009 9:56:39	To start, I am not a lawyer. With that out of the way, the GSL is concerned with tech/rules only. You can published your own IP (maps, descriptions, flavor, etc) as much as you want on your website. Just make sure that there are zero rules and tech on the website for now until the release the info on website GSL stuff.
#3 brambuldon Jan 27, 2009 10:49:29	On another note, I see that some companies are publishing material without the GSL, but still within copyright laws. As an individual, on the small scale, would it be wise to sign the GSL? It appears that several companies, such as Green Ronin and Adamant, are doing fine without the GSL. I see that the advantage of being without the GSL is that I can 'redefine' terms and established stuff (my Rakshasa are more like the hindu rakshasa, and aren't catlike at all, as established in the MM). But the advantage of signing is I'd actually be able to use the logo and could see added benefits from Wizards. Thoughts?
#4 crenshaw13 Jan 27, 2009 11:28:52	On another note, I see that some companies are publishing material without the GSL, but still within copyright laws. As an individual, on the small scale, would it be wise to sign the GSL? It appears that several companies, such as Green Ronin and Adamant, are doing fine without the GSL. I see that the advantage of being without the GSL is that I can 'redefine' terms and established stuff (my Rakshasa are more like the hindu rakshasa, and aren't catlike at all, as established in the MM). But the advantage of signing is I'd actually be able to use the logo and could see added benefits from Wizards. Thoughts? (Yes, yes, consult a lawyer first, we got it.) As a small publisher, I have no trouble going with the GSL. It's pretty open ended and forgiving as long as you are sticking to "pure" D&D 4e. I don't plan on creating entire new RPGs based on 4e, nor vast "Dark Sun-esque" settings that require one to alter the core stuff. Your Hindu Rakshasa only needs a name change and a change to one or two details and it's a new monster, and well within the GSL guidelines. (I'd personally stay away from the word "hindu" - but I get what you mean). The large publishers likely had long-term plans that got spoiled once the GSL was released, and they had to make business decisions to not go with it. Those decisions were not necessarily right or wrong, they were business decisions that (I assume) weighed benefits and risks. They also have the benefit of name recognition which you may not have. I certainly do not. For me, there is very little benefit with not going the GSL route, and very little risk by going with it. That's my business decision. Is the GSL perfect? Nope. It's one-sided. But it's also letting me license a powerful name for free and without royalty. That's huge for me. Financially, a royalty-free licensing capability is worth not having 100% of the typical licensing rights. Again, that's my business decision. So, the real question is, what's better for your business? Good luck!
#5 fatumd20 Jan 27, 2009 12:43:14	I would have to agree with Crenshaw13. I am a small time publisher myself and I found no reason why I can't/shouldn't use the GSL. I find it reasonable (and I know I'm in the minority on that). By not using the GSL, you are skirting a thin line that, as a small publisher, carries a huge risk if something doesn't go your way. By using the GSL, you have more options without the huge risk. Win/Win in my book.