| Author |
Message
|
| kunger00 |
 Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2008 11:13 am Post subject: Revocation of the d20 license? |
 |
|
Patron
Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Posts: 149
Location: central Texas
|
I just read on Monte Cook's Live Journal blog that WotC is not allowing anyone to sell anything with the d20 logo on it after the new year?
Let me understand this correctly...
No one who published a dead tree product with the d20 logo on the cover can sell after the new year? That any product they have in their warehouse that is unsold at that time has to be destroyed (well, they can't sell it, what else would they do with it?). Although he states that pdf's might survive because it is easier to take a logo off of the first page of a pdf than it is to take it off a print version.
He also hints at the fact that your FLGS also can not sell d20 products after the first of the year. (This part is less clear and maybe I'm misunderstanding this part)
Is this for real? is WotC *THAT* stupid?
I assume that the SRD stuff is safe, just not the stuff with a d20 logo. Right?
Wolfgang? Others in the industry? can you clear this up? Do I REALLY need to sell a kidney to purchase everything I can before the end of the year just because WotC is *THAT* insecure about their beloved 4E?
If this is true, it has the potential to be DISASTEROUS for many small publishers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Zherog |
| Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2008 11:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Contributor
Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 586
Location: Bensalem, PA
|
Standard Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV
| Quote: |
| No one who published a dead tree product with the d20 logo on the cover can sell after the new year? That any product they have in their warehouse that is unsold at that time has to be destroyed (well, they can't sell it, what else would they do with it?). Although he states that pdf's might survive because it is easier to take a logo off of the first page of a pdf than it is to take it off a print version. |
To my understanding, this is correct. As of the end of this year, the d20 License will cease to exist. No product - print or PDF - may make use of the license or the logo.
The OGL (which includes the SRD) is untouched by this change. And, in fact, WotC can't kill the OGL even if they wanted to. (and, frankly, I would have to assume they want to right now.)
| Quote: |
| He also hints at the fact that your FLGS also can not sell d20 products after the first of the year. (This part is less clear and maybe I'm misunderstanding this part) |
To the best of my understanding, this is incorrect. Any product already in circulation can go through the normal sales channels. Stock still in the publisher's warehouse - that is, unsold stock - must be destroyed.
_________________
John Ling
Freelance Writer
Kobold Fan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Wolfgang |
| Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2008 11:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Kobold Overlord
Joined: 30 Dec 2007
Posts: 4984
Location: The Mines
|
I believe that's correct. The d20 license has always been subject to revocation, which is why most of the 3rd party publishers move to the OGL instead.
Open Design has no d20 products affected by this change.
_________________
Wolfgang Baur
Publisher, Kobold Press |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| m8adam |
| Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2008 12:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Patron
Joined: 18 Nov 2008
Posts: 148
|
| warehouses full of sourcebooks being destroyed (*sobs*) because WotC doesn't want to share the d20 gaming market? Man, what a bunch of jerks. Couldn't the rest of the industry buy WotC's rights to DnD or something? They've totally ruined it. and I've only been playing for a year. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Zherog |
| Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2008 12:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Contributor
Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 586
Location: Bensalem, PA
|
| m8adam wrote: |
| warehouses full of sourcebooks being destroyed (*sobs*) because WotC doesn't want to share the d20 gaming market? Man, what a bunch of jerks. |
While I also weep at the thought of perfectly good books being destroyed, I disagree with your conclusion that the folks at WotC are a bunch of jerks. You have to remember that Dungeons and Dragons is a brand name of a major company, which in turn is a subsidiary of an even bigger conglomerate. Why would Hasbro/WotC want to allow competition - from a business perspective - when they don't have to?
Also, I don't think anybody really knows how much stuff is going to be destroyed; my guess: not much at all. Publishers have known forever that WotC could revoke the license; they've known for a long time that 4e was in the works, and it would make business sense for WotC to revoke the license; and, finally, WotC gave them significantly more lead time than necessary - over 6 months - in order to allow those companies to move their stock.
| Quote: |
| Couldn't the rest of the industry buy WotC's rights to DnD or something? They've totally ruined it. and I've only been playing for a year. |
I doubt Hasbro wants to sell. And while I'm not particularly a fan of 4e, I don't subscribe to the theory that WotC ruined the game. My game is completely unchanged. We still get together every other Saturday to hang out, chuck dice, and slay monsters. From my perspective, nothing has changed, therefore nothing is ruined. *shrug*
_________________
John Ling
Freelance Writer
Kobold Fan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| kunger00 |
| Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2008 1:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Patron
Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Posts: 149
Location: central Texas
|
| Zherog wrote: |
While I also weep at the thought of perfectly good books being destroyed, I disagree with your conclusion that the folks at WotC are a bunch of jerks. |
Over on Monte Cooks LJ site, there are a few that are trying to find out about donating all unsold materials to the troops.
Monte has offered to contact the various publishers and see if they will participate and a few of the posters over there are contacting the USO and the military to see how to go about donating. The hope being that all unsold copies don't get destroyed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| kunger00 |
| Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2008 1:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Patron
Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Posts: 149
Location: central Texas
|
| Zherog wrote: |
The OGL (which includes the SRD) is untouched by this change. And, in fact, WotC can't kill the OGL even if they wanted to. (and, frankly, I would have to assume they want to right now.)
|
Ya, I had heard that the OGL can't be revoked... that once something is made avalable for free, you can't revoke that. Or some such.
| Zherog wrote: |
| Quote: |
| He also hints at the fact that your FLGS also can not sell d20 products after the first of the year. (This part is less clear and maybe I'm misunderstanding this part) |
To the best of my understanding, this is incorrect. Any product already in circulation can go through the normal sales channels. Stock still in the publisher's warehouse - that is, unsold stock - must be destroyed. |
As I said, he didn't come right out and say that. It was just my impression from what he said. I hope you are right as I have a friend in the town I just moved from who owns the local game store and I would hate to see him take the financial hit of not being able to sell a large portion of his inventory.
Any news how this affects d20 modern licensing? Basically the same way? If it was OGL but not d20, it's ok? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Zherog |
| Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2008 1:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Contributor
Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 586
Location: Bensalem, PA
|
| kunger00 wrote: |
| Zherog wrote: |
The OGL (which includes the SRD) is untouched by this change. And, in fact, WotC can't kill the OGL even if they wanted to. (and, frankly, I would have to assume they want to right now.)
|
Ya, I had heard that the OGL can't be revoked... that once something is made avalable for free, you can't revoke that. Or some such. |
It's not really anything to do with it being free, and everything to do with the terms and conditions that were put into the license from the very beginning. The license itself explicitly states that it lasts forever.
| Quote: |
| As I said, he didn't come right out and say that. It was just my impression from what he said. I hope you are right as I have a friend in the town I just moved from who owns the local game store and I would hate to see him take the financial hit of not being able to sell a large portion of his inventory. |
As I recall, WotC didn't want to place the burden on the game shops, which is why they went with the "once it's in the market, it can be sold" method.
| Quote: |
| Any news how this affects d20 modern licensing? Basically the same way? If it was OGL but not d20, it's ok? |
Should be OK, yes. d20 Modern uses the OGL. There's rumors that WotC is working on a new version that builds off the 4e ruleset. However, I don't know if those rumors are true or not. But even if that happens, the current version would remain available.
_________________
John Ling
Freelance Writer
Kobold Fan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| varianor |
| Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2008 2:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Patron
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Posts: 602
|
| Actually, most "d20" product left in the channels was either overstock for a while or was released very late in the cycle. This is a good shot at getting stuff you might want but never had the cash for. I know my budget is a lean and hungry one. Suits me just fine. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| m8adam |
| Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2008 4:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Patron
Joined: 18 Nov 2008
Posts: 148
|
| I just think it's ridiculous that they're being so self-interested about a product which is really the product of 30 years (or so?) of community development. It's like if the first skate boarders waited til it got big then said that no one else could ride boards with 4 wheels cause they invented it, or own the rights. DnD is bigger than who owns the rights to it, and I think it's atrocious that WotC is so short-sighted and profit centered that they can't see they're alienating their consumers by eschewing the community oriented ideology which helped build DnD in the first place. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| deinol |
| Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2008 5:36 pm Post subject: Re: Revocation of the d20 license? |
|
|
Patron
Joined: 27 Aug 2008
Posts: 380
|
| kunger00 wrote: |
| He also hints at the fact that your FLGS also can not sell d20 products after the first of the year. (This part is less clear and maybe I'm misunderstanding this part) |
My impression from Monte Cook's post was he thought FLGS would be smart to run a sale at the same time. If you can get some awesome products direct for a discount price, it might be a good idea for local stores to clean out there stocks with sales as well.
It looks like Green Ronin will put most of their old books out using print on demand with a 3rd era imprint. I can't wait to get a copy of the Book of Fiends. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Zherog |
| Posted: Fri Dec 19, 2008 6:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
Contributor
Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 586
Location: Bensalem, PA
|
| m8adam wrote: |
| I just think it's ridiculous that they're being so self-interested about a product which is really the product of 30 years (or so?) of community development. It's like if the first skate boarders waited til it got big then said that no one else could ride boards with 4 wheels cause they invented it, or own the rights. DnD is bigger than who owns the rights to it, and I think it's atrocious that WotC is so short-sighted and profit centered that they can't see they're alienating their consumers by eschewing the community oriented ideology which helped build DnD in the first place. |
I understand your point (though I think your analogy is way off). I just happen to disagree with it. Wizards of the Coast isn't a public trust; it isn't a charity or non-profit organization. They're a publicly traded company. They're "job" is to make the stock holders happy by making wads of money.
The 3.5 version of the game is completely open to any publisher to use; the only thing that's been terminated is the d20 License. And that wasn't done on short notice. WotC gave plenty of notice - it was at least 6 months and might be more than that.
I'm not a 4e fan - though I also haven't had a chance to play it yet, so I'm reserving final judgment. But I find it really difficult to blame WotC because they wanted to make money.
_________________
John Ling
Freelance Writer
Kobold Fan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| kunger00 |
| Posted: Fri Dec 19, 2008 7:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Patron
Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Posts: 149
Location: central Texas
|
| Zherog wrote: |
The 3.5 version of the game is completely open to any publisher to use; the only thing that's been terminated is the d20 License. And that wasn't done on short notice. WotC gave plenty of notice - it was at least 6 months and might be more than that.
I'm not a 4e fan - though I also haven't had a chance to play it yet, so I'm reserving final judgment. But I find it really difficult to blame WotC because they wanted to make money. |
My issue isn't with the revocation of the d20 license... which, to my understanding, is as simple as having put a d20 logo on your cover. (I'm not a publisher or expert on this topic though so I could be WAY wrong).
I guess my real issue is that any books printed prior to the withdrawl of the license must be destroyed.
In a perfect world, I guess, I would have liked to have seen something like WotC saying, "No more. Sell what you have but reprints must not claim d20. No new books with d20."
That of course, would be difficult to enforce, but then again, so is the destruction of existing stock.
I guess, to boil my feelings on this topic down to their bare bones, my issue is with the demanding of existing stock be destroyed if unsold by the 1st.
The statement that this stock, unless something published just before the announcement, is overstock anyway is probably true... but I still see that as wasteful and... I don't know... it just... gets me...
Sort of like the day when I was walking through a "big box" store and witnessed remainder books having their covers ripped off to be returned to their publisher.
::shudder::
I *STILL* have nightmares about that day.
I can imagine the souls of all these d20 books crying out into the aether as they are dumped into the land fill resulting in a Star Wars-esque moment as a disruption of the Force occurs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Zherog |
| Posted: Fri Dec 19, 2008 8:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
Contributor
Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 586
Location: Bensalem, PA
|
| kunger00 wrote: |
| My issue isn't with the revocation of the d20 license... which, to my understanding, is as simple as having put a d20 logo on your cover. (I'm not a publisher or expert on this topic though so I could be WAY wrong). |
There was a little more to it, but not much.
| Quote: |
| I guess my real issue is that any books printed prior to the withdrawl of the license must be destroyed. >>snipperooski<< |
That's a fair point, and I certainly can't argue against it. Destruction of stock is pretty normal, as I understand it; though I do agree it would've been nice to allow the sale of existing stuff to continue.
_________________
John Ling
Freelance Writer
Kobold Fan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Wolfgang |
| Posted: Fri Dec 19, 2008 9:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Kobold Overlord
Joined: 30 Dec 2007
Posts: 4984
Location: The Mines
|
Alas, destruction of unsold copies is typical in publishing. Magazines fall into that category as well as remaindered books.
_________________
Wolfgang Baur
Publisher, Kobold Press |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
