Discussion:Licensing

What licenses may I use?

 Airos  Talk  Contribs  Email  07:08, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

I have some confusion over the licensing of any of my original works that I may submit here. The General Disclaimer page seems to suggest that I submit my work as either one license or the other. When editing a page the disclaimer "Please note that all contributions to D&D Wiki are considered to be released under the GNU Free Documentation License 1.2 (see D&D_Wiki:Copyrights for details). If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here." seems to suggest otherwise.

I wish to keep my works within the OGL for several reasons, not the least of which would to retain the ability to submit my work to other sites without the burden of tacking on an additional license, (which may or may not be permitted under the terms of the OGL).

The only drawback I can see to this is that all modifications must also remain under the OGL, (although this isn't any different than the language found in the GNU FDL).

I'm fairly certain that use of other licenses, (such as the Creative Commons license), is not permitted.

I thank you in advance for your answers.

Green Dragon 17:18, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

If you want to license it under the OGL please use Template:OGL Top on the very top and Template:OGL Bottom (with the parameters filled out) after the breadcrumb.

Of course I would recommend you keep it under the GNU FDL. Getting your work published works with the GNU FDL, for example see the Coin Golem (3.5e Creature) (which was actually even started here).

 Airos  Talk  Contribs  Email  22:36, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, that's kind of the situation I'm talking about. Both licenses must apply to the work, since once something is released under either license it cannot be taken out of that license. Section #2 of the GNU FDL is in conflict with Section #2 of the OGL.

GNU FDL:

you add no other conditions whatsoever to those of this License.

the Open Game Content may only be Used under and in terms of this License.

Anything in the SRD or PRD is under the OGL, and thus it must be labeled as such, yet the entire 'document' must be released under the GNU FDL. It seems like a huge headache to have to distinguish between the two through the use of formatting.

As long as I'm free to release original work here under the OGL and I'm not beholden to the GNU FDL, then that's the route I would prefer to take for the ease of submitting my work to other places.

Green Dragon 23:33, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Of course, if it is already under the GNU FDL then you cannot change the license. But new content you, of course, can license under the OGL. Just use what I talked about above.

75.69.102.52 00:02, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

There seems to be a bit of confusion as to what taken out of that license means, as per this statement:

once something is released under either license it cannot be taken out of that license

Provided you are the author (and thus the holder of the copyright) for the work, you can release that work under as many different licenses as you desire -- even incompatible licenses. Once under the GNU FDL you cannot revoke the right of anyone else to use (and copy) the work under the GNU FDL -- that's what that line means, and the same for the OGL. But as the copyright author you are free to license your work to another (or the same) party under a completely different license should you so desire. People do this all the time.

 Airos  Talk  Contribs  Email  01:05, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

@Green Dragon: Thank you for your replies, that helps me to better understand my rights.

@75.69.102.52: Right, and I am not the original copyright holder of anything in the SRD or the PRD. Everything in those two documents is licensed to me, free of charge, as long as I follow the rules in the OGL. Now, if I were to create any document, such as a creature or NPC, I would be required to format everything in a manner that clearly distinguishes OGL material from GNU FDL material, (while a link would be sufficient for the purposes of this site, it needs to also be clear in a plain text document which license applies to each section).

If I am permitted to publish here under a single license, (which Green Dragon has confirmed), that would be my personal preference. It makes it easier for my to know how my works have been released, it makes it easier for anyone using my work to know what their legal rights are and it makes it easier for anyone who wishes to copy my works to do so, since they will not need to keep multiple licenses attached to the document nor will they need to maintain special formatting to distinguish between the two.

Back to Main Page → Meta Pages → Discussions