On Mon, 21 Aug 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In a message dated 8/21/00 11:17:28 AM Central Daylight Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > If you made a habit of publishing OGC monsters in
> > every Guild Companion magazine and I republished all of them as a stand-
> > alone for-profit supplement with none of my own content, I don't think
> > you would be experiencing pleasant thoughts.
> But that would be your right under the OGL as it stands. And if you made
> money, that would be your money. And the Guild Companion folks know it to.
> Which is why they will likely not put something truly cool and unique into
> OGC just to avoid that circumstance. Which is *their* right under the OGL.
We'd also be fairly surprised if anyone could make money from
repackaging OGC material that was freely available on our site for
download. More power to anyone who can.
We do expect that the really good stuff will be going in the
modules. Since we're mostly interested in publishing settings, adventures,
and the like, much of the intellectual property is going to be closed
content. The authors will want to keep control of their settings, their
metaplots, their characters, and so forth. And I don't have a problem with
that. Some content will necessarily be OGC, some may be donated as
OGC. And again, I don't have a problem with that.
If all goes well, there are folk waiting in the wings of the Guild
Companion with potential settings which will require rules which simply
don't exist yet in D20. We may co-opt OGC material. We are just as likely
to write our own and that material will (very probably) become OGC
content.
Regards,
Nicholas HM Caldwell
General Editor for The Guild Companion
http://www.guildcompanion.com/
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
