This probably would have popped sooner on my radar if people I know played Cypher System, but MCG released an open license on July 22 of this year.
Full links below, but the first indication something was up could be found in faded font at the bottom of the press release. Bold mine.
Quote from: Open License Press Release
Please note that the Cypher System Open License, although open in nature, is a legal agreement that you enter into with Monte Cook Games, LLC, if you publish under its terms. This page's depictions of the CSOL's terms are descriptive only; refer to the Cypher System Open License for actual terms and conditions. Be sure you read, understand, and agree to the terms of the Cypher System Open License before publishing.
A couple clicks later you get to the license itself, but I will offer to save you some time and pull out two interesting sections. Again, bold mine.
Quote from: Cypher System Open License: section/paragraph 10
Neither the Work nor any advertising, promotions, press releases, or other documents affiliated with the Work may contain racist, homophobic, discriminatory, or other repugnant views; overt political agendas or views; depictions or descriptions of criminal violence against children; rape or other acts of criminal perversion; or other obscene material.
Consider how many different definitions, interpretations, etc. could be applied to what you read above as you read the punchline.
Quote from: Cypher System Open License: section/paragraph 14
If You breach any of the terms of this Agreement, it results in automatic termination of the Agreement. Unless the breach is cured to MCG's sole satisfaction and such cure is documented by a written agreement between You and MCG within 15 days of breach, You must immediately recall and destroy all existing copies of the Work. You may additionally be subject to damages as a result of breach.
Would any of you consider this an open license?
Press release: https://www.montecookgames.com/the-cypher-system-open-license-is-now-available/ (https://www.montecookgames.com/the-cypher-system-open-license-is-now-available/)
License: https://csol.montecookgames.com/license/ (https://csol.montecookgames.com/license/)
First thought that came to me was, "Who the hell defines 'repugnant' in this arrangement?"
Second was, "What constitutes an 'overt' political agenda?"
Third was, "You realize this completely disqualifies any historical or modern setting which goes into any detail about the actual beliefs of most Christian, Jewish, Muslim or Buddhist denominations throughout history, or assumes most NPCs of those faiths are going to share those beliefs even if the PCs don't care?"
Fourth was, "This is really just a trap designed to allow MCG to hit any user of their system they don't like with a lawsuit, isn't it?"
This kind of shit is why I lost my interest in making my own rpgs. I can't just make games for entertainment value anymore, I have to be an activist too? Okay, fuck rpgs then. I'm better off writing romance novels or something.
Quote from: Stephen Tannhauser on October 07, 2022, 04:44:40 PM
Fourth was, "This is really just a trap designed to allow MCG to hit any user of their system they don't like with a lawsuit, isn't it?"
We have a winner.
For example, "overt political agenda" means "politics I disagree with".
"You may additionally be subject to damages...."
He's just setting an obvious trap. He probably thinks that people can't wait to adopt all of his innovative ideas, and will be willing to bow their knee and kiss his ring.
He is probably lauded with high praises, over on the big purple cow. Moo!!!
Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on October 07, 2022, 04:51:40 PM
This kind of shit is why I lost my interest in making my own rpgs. I can't just make games for entertainment value anymore, I have to be an activist too? Okay, fuck rpgs then. I'm better off writing romance novels or something.
You'd make a lot more money writing romance novels. 😉
Quote from: RebelSky on October 09, 2022, 07:55:56 AM
Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on October 07, 2022, 04:51:40 PM
This kind of shit is why I lost my interest in making my own rpgs. I can't just make games for entertainment value anymore, I have to be an activist too? Okay, fuck rpgs then. I'm better off writing romance novels or something.
You'd make a lot more money writing romance novels. 😉
Depressing but true.
Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on October 07, 2022, 04:51:40 PM
This kind of shit is why I lost my interest in making my own rpgs. I can't just make games for entertainment value anymore, I have to be an activist too? Okay, fuck rpgs then. I'm better off writing romance novels or something.
We find Cook's dogma to be... repugnant.
That is right kids. By his own rules his own rules fire him from the game. Bravo Mr Cook.
But this is ever the case with the woke and the social justice cultists. They make these rules never thinking that the rules might someday be applied to them.
Its like with OneBookShelf. Whats wacist? Well they will "know it when they see it."
Guess what OBS? We know you are racist fucks because you push and enforce these hateful racebaiting agendas with sickening fervor.
Why would anyone use this?
other repugnant views ... You must immediately recall and destroy all existing copies of the Work
So, basically, if your product contains a view that Cook finds repugnant, whatever that may be, then not only do you have to stop selling your product, you have to do a recall??
No serious publisher is going to touch this. They're going to get legal advice and likely realize that the "license" can be withdrawn on a whim.
Monte Cooke is a leftist woke cuck. Even though I love Numenera, he can screw off. And this is rich coming from a guy who both employs and dates a woman (if he can even define what that is) that writes BDSM erotica as a side hussle.
Of course. The rules only ever apply to someone else. Perfectly fine for the woke to do these things because they are being somehow inclusive!
That is till someone finally levels the gut at them. This its all wailing and gnashing of teeth at how horrible these woke people are and how they were reeeeeeallly one of us all along and please help. (By buying their now totally not woke products!)
The original Free Software and Open Source movements debated the issue of "ethical behavior" clauses a long time ago and concluded that they were (a) open to abuse and (b) incompatible with the goal of not having to ask permission to reuse free/open content. If I'm having to check with the copyright holder to make sure that my derivative work is OK because the rules are unclear or ambiguous, that's not an open license.
So no, this is not an open license in the original sense. In particular, this:
Quote from: Cypher System Open License: section/paragraph 14
If You breach any of the terms of this Agreement, it results in automatic termination of the Agreement. Unless the breach is cured to MCG's sole satisfaction and such cure is documented by a written agreement between You and MCG within 15 days of breach, You must immediately recall and destroy all existing copies of the Work. You may additionally be subject to damages as a result of breach.
...is the single most malicious clause I've ever seen in a license, open or not.
Great job to the OP doing the work to find this. It's worded so vaguely that they could pull back on anything they disagree with which, as has been pointed out, is just code for, "align to our wokiness or pay the price." Well, he can take that attitude and pound sand. I'm done buying anything from MCG and I previously was a customer. No longer.
I was a huge fan of the setting of Numenera but based on several political statements MC has made and based on this, he will not get one more dime of my money.
I thought maybe this was a bit overblown at first, perhaps taken out of context. Then I looked at the license. Yeah, I don't see why anyone would ever release a product using this license. You'd be deliberately harming your product and putting yourself at the mercy of a third party.
Without the license, at worst you just lose out on the product recognition of explicitly saying "Cypher System" -- But is that even a selling point for most gamers? I don't see that having much pull.
I don't really have a horse in this race, but I'll play Devil's Advocate here for a moment.
If you like Cypher stuff and either 1) agree with or 2) are neutral to MCG's political beliefs, why not use it? Ya, the "naughty stuff" clause is vague, but the more vague something is, the less enforceable it is in law. A number of us advocate for less political content in games anyway.
Quote from: Almost_Useless on October 10, 2022, 04:56:32 PM
I don't really have a horse in this race, but I'll play Devil's Advocate here for a moment.
If you like Cypher stuff and either 1) agree with or 2) are neutral to MCG's political beliefs, why not use it? Ya, the "naughty stuff" clause is vague, but the more vague something is, the less enforceable it is in law. A number of us advocate for less political content in games anyway.
From my view, it doesn't matter if I agree with Monte Cook's current political beliefs. Using this license means that the product would be forever tied to however his views might change. He might later change to take up some views that I disagree with, and then push to revoke the license because of material in the product. Even if it is harder to enforce under the law, if he has an excuse to take legal action as violation of contract, then that would be a huge legal headache even if I were to eventually win.
That's fair. I hadn't considered how common it is that moving the goalposts is a problem in itself.
Quote from: Zelen on October 10, 2022, 04:18:05 PM
I thought maybe this was a bit overblown at first, perhaps taken out of context. Then I looked at the license. Yeah, I don't see why anyone would ever release a product using this license. You'd be deliberately harming your product and putting yourself at the mercy of a third party.
Without the license, at worst you just lose out on the product recognition of explicitly saying "Cypher System" -- But is that even a selling point for most gamers? I don't see that having much pull.
I know. At a glance its like. "No one is that stupid and hateful right?" But then you keep reading and it just keeps snowballing.
Sadly no. This really is Cook being Cook. Why? Who knows. But this new license thing makes Palladium look absolutely tame in comparison. All Cook needs now is a "You make it with our IP/system, we own it." clause and he's all set.
Quote from: Almost_Useless on October 10, 2022, 04:56:32 PM
I don't really have a horse in this race, but I'll play Devil's Advocate here for a moment.
If you like Cypher stuff and either 1) agree with or 2) are neutral to MCG's political beliefs, why not use it? Ya, the "naughty stuff" clause is vague, but the more vague something is, the less enforceable it is in law. A number of us advocate for less political content in games anyway.
The problem is that the call is totally Cooks. And you would be under the Damocles of any mood swings and change of edicts such that today your work is fine. Tomorrow you are being sued and forced to recall your product because your book cover is blue and Cook just announced Blue is Wacist and your book is repugnant and must go! Orf with iz ead!
I've seen similar happen before with even informal deals where today you are fine. And the next the company you have the agreement with is now denying you.
I'm suprused the big purple was not calling MC the latest coming of Christ.
What a shitty OGL and I hope it tanks.
I hope a group of anonymous writers and artists collaborate to make the most vile, horrifying RPG of all time that goes far out of its way to be breathtakingly racist and sexist while glorifying raping the family dog, something that makes FATAL look like the pinnacle of art. And I hope they use the Cypher system for it, splashing the logo on every unused inch of the book before releasing it to every corner of the internet and sending copies to as many journalists as possible.
Quote from: Valatar on October 11, 2022, 12:12:28 AM
I hope a group of anonymous writers and artists collaborate to make the most vile, horrifying RPG of all time that goes far out of its way to be breathtakingly racist and sexist while glorifying raping the family dog, something that makes FATAL look like the pinnacle of art. And I hope they use the Cypher system for it, splashing the logo on every unused inch of the book before releasing it to every corner of the internet and sending copies to as many journalists as possible.
well i know what to look out for
You know, if you wanted to get "credit" for having an open license, but you didn't want anyone to actually use it, you could do worse than this plan. Just saying.
Quote from: Valatar on October 11, 2022, 12:12:28 AM
I hope a group of anonymous writers and artists collaborate to make the most vile, horrifying RPG of all time that goes far out of its way to be breathtakingly racist and sexist while glorifying raping the family dog, something that makes FATAL look like the pinnacle of art. And I hope they use the Cypher system for it, splashing the logo on every unused inch of the book before releasing it to every corner of the internet and sending copies to as many journalists as possible.
Thirsty Sword Lesbians beat you to it.
Quote from: Steven Mitchell on October 11, 2022, 01:15:39 PM
You know, if you wanted to get "credit" for having an open license, but you didn't want anyone to actually use it, you could do worse than this plan. Just saying.
It's like an OGL, but only for his close personal friends.
Quote from: jhkim on October 10, 2022, 05:16:57 PMFrom my view, it doesn't matter if I agree with Monte Cook's current political beliefs. Using this license means that the product would be forever tied to however his views might change.
To go on with the devil's advocacy, would this kind of licensing be more legally viable/culturally acceptable if it was tied to something broader and more objective? If I were of a more evangelistic mindset, for example, I could see a different version of myself riffing on this idea to write an OGL that licensed a game system I designed only on condition that it not be used for settings based on assumptions that explicitly contradict the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
The Catechism being an objective public reference and not something I could personally change, it would grant users considerably more protection from legal abuse on my end, would be a lot clearer to potential licensees what was and wasn't permissible, and would provide a common reference for any legal conflict adjudication. But the basic problem -- i.e. whose right to free speech prevails in a conflict between license-user and license-owner over licensed-product content -- still remains.
The big fail here is I cannot think of an easier system to write generic content for without a license.
Consider:
1. All difficulties are rated 1-10, the most generic range.
2. Characters are all "I am a <adjective><noun> who <verbs>." The adjectives and verbs are dead simple to write and you could literally call them "character adjectives" and "character verb" (
Cypher System) calls them descriptor and focus. Classes (nouns or type) are little more complex and customizing them without using terminology would be harder, but much less necessary. Alternate names for types are even suggested in the book which could be your top-level names.
3. Cyphers, one-time abilities, are actually more easily done without the system terminology of physical cyphers (objects and the original usage in
Numenara) and subtle cyphers. Just call them items and tricks.
I guess they might try to sue on using descriptors and foci from the games, but they are single works or phrases. Good luck on that lawsuit.
So, by poison-pilling the "open" license for the system that needs it least this looks like a virtue signal much more than an attempt to even do as well as FFG has done with
Genesys for third-party product. It's also one of those things that like PayPal this past weekend you probably can't backpedal out of like FFG did with the previously mentioned license. Unlike that screw-up selling this as "poor wording" is damn near impossible, especially with Monte Cook Games's investment in thinks like their consent checklists and drive.
Quote from: Stephen Tannhauser on October 11, 2022, 07:18:25 PM
Quote from: jhkim on October 10, 2022, 05:16:57 PMFrom my view, it doesn't matter if I agree with Monte Cook's current political beliefs. Using this license means that the product would be forever tied to however his views might change.
To go on with the devil's advocacy, would this kind of licensing be more legally viable/culturally acceptable if it was tied to something broader and more objective? If I were of a more evangelistic mindset, for example, I could see a different version of myself riffing on this idea to write an OGL that licensed a game system I designed only on condition that it not be used for settings based on assumptions that explicitly contradict the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
For me, that doesn't change much. The problem isn't the code - it's who gets to decide it. If there was someone I trusted, I'd probably just submit my material to them rather than write under an open license that they would monitor and judge.
As others have pointed out, it doesn't necessarily require an open gaming license to publish material that is compatible with a system. A number of people have done it. However, there are risks. Wizards of the Coast was sued by Palladium in the mid-1990s for The Primal Order. They eventually settled, but it was costly.
Quote from: jhkim on October 11, 2022, 10:55:06 PM
As others have pointed out, it doesn't necessarily require an open gaming license to publish material that is compatible with a system. A number of people have done it. However, there are risks. Wizards of the Coast was sued by Palladium in the mid-1990s for The Primal Order. They eventually settled, but it was costly.
Right, but Wizards openly claimed PFRPG compatibility and thus used a Palladium trademark. That is easily avoided here.
Quote from: PulpHerb on October 11, 2022, 10:35:01 PM
The big fail here is I cannot think of an easier system to write generic content for without a license.
Exactly. There's zero reason at all to use a license like this.
Anything with Cook's name on it should be given a careful once-over anyways. I haven't taken him seriously since it came out that it was his idea to nerf the living fuck out of martial classes in 3E.
Quote from: Ghostmaker on October 13, 2022, 08:05:48 AM
Anything with Cook's name on it should be given a careful once-over anyways.
That's a good rule. Cook is a pretty interesting idea guy, but works much better with an editor/handler. I think the fact that first edition
Numenera had a lot of "what's the point" problems that required the second round to fix is a classic example.
The Cypher genre books including the safety checklists is another example. Yeah, it's wokeness adjacent but it seems more a failure of focus than an ideological crusade. Of course, his handler/editor these days is ideologically committed to the damn things (and thus proves she's an idiot in terms of the community she took them from) so that drives his focus. With a different editor/handler/business partner I think he'd probably make some interesting games.
Quote from: Ghostmaker on October 13, 2022, 08:05:48 AM
Anything with Cook's name on it should be given a careful once-over anyways. I haven't taken him seriously since it came out that it was his idea to nerf the living fuck out of martial classes in 3E.
It doesn't help that when WotC finally tried to fix it, the attempt was scorned as "weeaboo fightan magic."
Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on October 13, 2022, 12:46:14 PM
Quote from: Ghostmaker on October 13, 2022, 08:05:48 AM
Anything with Cook's name on it should be given a careful once-over anyways. I haven't taken him seriously since it came out that it was his idea to nerf the living fuck out of martial classes in 3E.
It doesn't help that when WotC finally tried to fix it, the attempt was scorned as "weeaboo fightan magic."
Which was the biggest and still remains the largest load of buckshot from the fanbase who likes magic.
Their favored casters are allowed to do stuff because it's magic stupid. Anyone else is considered to anime or manga fuck that noise. Unfortunately 3.5 spoiled players who like casters because any attempt to tone down what they can do is nerfing them. Boohoo here is an orchestra of the world smallest instruments you can cry with. They won't try any D&D part 3.5/Pathfindef because they can no longer dominant the battlefield.
Okay, so let's read this again carefully...
Quote from: Cypher System Open License: section/paragraph 10
Neither the Work nor any advertising, promotions, press releases, or other documents affiliated with the Work may contain racist, homophobic, discriminatory, or other repugnant views; overt political agendas or views; depictions or descriptions of criminal violence against children; rape or other acts of criminal perversion; or other obscene material.
It doesn't specify that the material cannot glorify "repugnant views," only that it cannot contain them. So no Nazi-esque villians for the heroes to fight against, I guess. The baddies cannot be motivated by zenophobia (real or misplaced).
No "depictions... of criminal violence against children." So you can't use dead women and children as a hook to get the PCs involved. I guess on the plus side this solves the "what do we do with the orc infants" question... you just ignore them. (Oh, wait! Isn't negligence considered "criminal violence against children?" What a conundrum!)
"Other obscene material."
Like what? The middle finger? Boobs? Plumber's crack?
____
Of course I'm mostly taking the piss here. The point is this is so poorly written and vague, I don't see courts honoring a termination in anything but most egregious cases. Federal law (and by extension most state laws) defines "obscene" as pornographic. A legal contract would ostensibly use legal definitions for such terms unless otherwise specified by that contract. Unless MCG clearly indicates what they consider "obscene" or "repugnant," anyone with the time & money to challenge a termination on these terms is likely to win.
Ultimately, though, what is the point of using the licence unless you really want to
de facto tie your setting to another Cypher setting? Arguably the best feature of Cypher is the simplicity of the 1-10 Difficulty (3-30 TN) mechanic, but anyone can use that without all the other baggage.
Therein lies the problem. Its a scam clause. And I have a feeling its actually illegal with how it is not defined there.
I know several states take a rather dim view of the old "by using this material/site/etc you absolve us of any wrongdoing and waive the right to sue us if we do anything bad like oh, take your money and fail to deliver.
It seems to me that a lot of classic fantasy and science fiction art (Frank Frazetta comes to mind, or some pics from the LBBs of OD&D) would be deemed as "obscene" or "inappropriate" by the feminist left...and some could be considered "...other acts of criminal perversion" (I mean, having a near-nekked or fully nekked woman using an axe on a horde of lustful-looking Orcs could be considered "criminal" given the backstory).
Quote from: Osman Gazi on October 14, 2022, 10:14:14 AM
It seems to me that a lot of classic fantasy and science fiction art (Frank Frazetta comes to mind, or some pics from the LBBs of OD&D) would be deemed as "obscene" or "inappropriate" by the feminist left...and some could be considered "...other acts of criminal perversion" (I mean, having a near-nekked or fully nekked woman using an axe on a horde of lustful-looking Orcs could be considered "criminal" given the backstory).
Murder is also a "criminal perversion." Guess your game can't feature assassins then...
As others have pointed out, this reads like either a trap or a virtue signal (or both). The vagueries won't hold up in court, but not many small companies will be willing to invest the time and money a legal proceeding would entail. So, effectively, Monty can just shut down anyone who doesn't pass his purity test. Best thing anyone can do is not use the license in the first place.
P.S. - I also noticed the specific wording of no "overt" political agendas or views. So... are COVERT agendas allowed? I guess that explains why all the art in Numenera Destiny is of black- or brown-skinned people; covertly erasing "whiteness" from the setting.