Late, there were many misconceptions about the recent D&D 4E GSL. I've seen people saying that the GSL forbids you from posting your fan-created stuff on discussions boards, and people saying that WotC killed the OGL and eliminated all competition.
EnWorld posted an excellent FAQ about the GSL on their website, focused on eliminating these misunderstandings. There is nothing revealing about it: the GSL still sucks. But to clarify things, it's still less restrictive than regular copyright laws, and there may still be some reason for someone to submit a product to it.
For those who can't see it:
I've decided to write my own little GSL FAQ. Please remember, this is not legal advice - I'm not a lawyer! - and the items below didn't come from WotC, merely my own reading of the GSL and, to an extent, my own experience in publishing. However, there are some histrionics and rather bizarre claims out there regarding the new license, and I have seen all those below more than a few times; I apologise to those of you who think that the below items are obvious: you're right, they are. I also apologise if I've gotten anything wrong! But here goes:
WotC is trying to copyright X! They can't do that! They can't claim they own the word "demon" or whatever!
You're right. They can't copyright the word "demon". Fortunately for you, you can feel vindicated in the fact that they have neither done so nor attempted to do so. In fact, run a quick search for the word "copyright" on the GSL; you'll find four instances, not one of which is a copyright claim.
So that means I can use their "Defined Terms" however I like, right? Because WotC doesn't own them!
Again, you are right in that WotC does not "own" those words. Nowhere does it say they do. All they've said is "if you want to use our logo and stuff, you need to agree to use those words as defined in the core rules and not change that meaning".
The OGL is dead!
No, it's not. It never will be; it can't be. The OGL can not be rescinded; anything released under the OGL will remain Open Gaming Content forever.
What? I can't release software under the GSL?
Not under the GSL you can't, no. You couldn't under the old d20 STL, either. If you want to write software, you do it the same way as the rest of the world without a convenient GSL does: you use normal copyright law, and you don't use WotC's logo on it. And you definitely use a lawyer! In short: you don't release software under this license.
Yes, I know there was lots of software for 3E. Truthfully, much of it bore branding which was not legally allowed, but either flew under WotC's radar or they turned a blind eye to it. Very little of it bore the d20 logo, anyway, so wasn't governed by the d20 STL. Will WotC turn a blind eye still? Who knows!
The "no character generation" part of the license means I can't write a new class or race!
The "no character generation" part of the license is the same as the old d20 STL. It refers to (a) telling people how to generate ability scores; (b) telling people how to apply experience points and gain levels. It does not mean you can't create new classes, races, powers, feats, monsters or anything else. In fact, the official FAQ says that. Basically, it's there to stop you writing a competing game; you can write supporting supplements for 4E but you can't compete with 4E and still use this license. That's fair, right? WotC are saying "Hey, you can use this nifty logo free of charge, but don't use our own logo to compete with us - use it to work with us"
Aha! I have an ingenious idea! I'll just make two companies and circumvent the GSL/OGL exclusivity clause!
Ingenious or not, it's not new - people have been suggesting it since the GSL was first hinted at. It's not a great idea, though - first off, yes, you might get away with it; WotC might not notice, and if they did, they might not care. But they can rescind or change this license for any reason without notice; so if you try to weasel your way around clauses in the agreement, you might just annoy them enough to say: "Hey, we don't want to play with you any more. Stop using our license."
They're infringing on my "rights"!
Most often heard in the context of "they're trying to take away my right to use the OGL!" OK, first off: a license is not an Act of Parliament, a Sovereign Proclamation, a statute, a declaration of law, or a Bill of Congress; it does not remove rights. It's a contract - a mere agreement. They're not infringing on your rights; they're saying "Hey, do you like this nifty logo and stuff? If you think it will net you more sales, we'll let you use it! But in exchange for it, we ask you to voluntarily agree to not do certain things. As long as our agreement stands, you can continue to slap this lovely D&D logo on your books!"
A voluntary agreement does not restrict your rights; agreeing not to do something does not restrict your rights; agreeing to do something does not restrict your rights. If I offered to give you $5 to walk to the shop and buy me a sandwich, am I restricting your rights to stand in the corner and mope? No; you are agreeing to do something of your own free will.
Now I can't have a website under the GSL!
Well, no. But why would you want a website licensed under the GSL? You don't need the GSL to have a website - people have been managing that for years! Again, the point is not "WotC has made D&D websites illegal!", it's "You can't use this book publishing license with a website - it's a license for books." Just like the software restriction, above. Your website isn't part of your product.
Incidentally, remember that WotC will be issuing a "fan site policy" at some point, in which they'll specifically say what they're comfortable with people doing on the web; but, again, remember it's not a declaration of law, just a policy. The policy may have a logo and license, etc., attached, but that's unlikely; it's more likely to be a statement of intent from WotC and, just like every other of the 20 million fansites for every other game, movie, TV show, novel series, sport, etc., on the web, is governed by standard copyright laws.
So you're saying I don't need the GSL; I just need to obey copyright laws?
No, you don't need the GSL. But using it makes things a hell of a lot easier for you. Instead of muddling through copyright and intellectual property laws and risking screwing up and getting nasty letters from WotC, they've given you an easy-to-understand license whereby they give you permission to do a bunch of things with no risk of legal action. Think of it as a convenient shortcut of IP issues, coupled with a cool logo; it's a "safe harbour" where you know you're protected.
You can't copyright rules mechanics!
This is the one I hear most often; and yes it's true; and no, it's not relevant. I hear it about the GSL, I heard it about the OGL. I think it gets posted because someone snoops around on a copyright-related website, finds this little gem and then gleefully posts it. Unfortunately, it has nothing at all to do with the GSL, or the OGL, or the d20 STL or any other license. Y'see, as I mentioned above, the license is not a statement of copyright; it is a contract. An agreement between two parties; it doesn't steer anywhere near copyright issues: in fact, that's the whole point of it! If the person you're discussing the GSL (or the OGL or the d20 STL) starts twittering on about copyrights, feel free to exit the conversation, because it's a totally different one to the one you're having and not related to the licenses at all - and, to boot, is a sign that they likely haven't read the licenses they're complaining about.
WotC can revoke the license at any time!
Yes. Yes, they can. That is, unfortunately, a risk you have to take if you use the GSL: unlike the OGL, it is revocable, much like the d20 STL was.
But what does that mean? Well, as you know, the d20 STL has been revoked; third-party-publishers have been given a 6-month grace period to sell off backstock, at which point they will not be able to sell products released under that license. In practice, that means taking the d20 logo off the books, along with a couple of lines of compatibility text. So a revocation of the GSL, while inconvenient, isn't quite as drastic as you may think at first: you'll need to remove some brand-related stuff, but by-and-large you should be OK. You should be aware that there's no "open" SRD this time round, though, so you'll have to be careful about general copyright issues - but a general copyright discusison is far beyond the scope of this FAQ, and it's what you should be hiring a lawyer for. For print publishers with large stock, this could prove to be a problem; for PDF publishers, it's more just an inconvenience - but a surmountable one.
WotC's own products violate the license!
Ah, one of the more silly things I've heard people say. Granted, not that many people say it, but I have heard it. WotC doesn't need a license to use its own property; it can do whatever it wants with its own stuff. And can attach any conditions it likes when it lends its stuff to someone else. It's not in violation of the license because it doesn't use the license.
