What You Agree To When You Publish

When you press Publish on a record, a confirmation step shows the notice that will be generated and asks you to check three boxes. You cannot publish until all three are checked. They are not fine print — they are the core of what makes you, not the platform, the publisher of record.

“The game-mechanics content in this record is Open Game Content, and I am entitled to publish it under the Open Game License 1.0a.”

What it means. The rules content — the numbers, the mechanics, the procedures — is either your own original work, or it is derived from material that was itself released as Open Game Content. Open Game Content is the only thing the OGL lets you build on; Product Identity (names, settings, characters, art, lore) is not.

Why it is here. OGL 1.0a §8 requires a publisher to clearly identify which portions of a work are Open Game Content. Checking this box is you making that identification. It is also what lets the generated notice say “the game-mechanics content of this work is designated as Open Game Content.”

What it is not. It is not a certification by TheCrazyGM that your classification is correct. The site records the declaration and builds the notice; it does not independently verify that a given rule is OGC or that you have the rights you say you have.

“I own or control this material, or I have permission to publish it. Any Product Identity it references — names, settings, characters, organizations, trademarks, artwork, or lore — belongs to its owner, is disclosed in the attestation above, and is not being claimed here.”

What it means. You wrote it, or you have a real right to publish it (a licence, permission, work you commissioned with the right terms). And anything protected that your work only references for flavour — a monster name, a place, a faction — you have listed under Referenced Product Identity so it is not swept in as if you were releasing it.

Why it is here. This is the representation that shifts the factual responsibility for the submission to the person who actually knows its history — you. TheCrazyGM hosts and redistributes what you publish; it has no way to know whether you drew a stat block from an OGC bestiary or copied it out of a book that was never opened.

The Product Identity half matters. Referencing a protected name is usually fine under OGL 1.0a §7 as long as you are not claiming it and not implying compatibility or endorsement. Disclosing it in the attestation keeps that boundary explicit. See Compatibility & Trademarks.

“I will respond in good faith if someone reports a rights problem with this record.”

What it means. If a rights holder contacts TheCrazyGM claiming your published record uses their material without permission, and the site asks you for your side of it, you will actually engage — explain where the content came from, correct it, or take it down — rather than ignore it.

Why it is here. The platform operates a rights-reporting and takedown process (it has to — see Rights Complaints & Takedowns). That process works far better, and is far less likely to end with your content simply removed, if the contributor is reachable and cooperative. This box is your commitment to be that.

What it is not. It is not an admission that any future complaint is valid, and it does not waive any rights you have. It is a promise to participate, not to concede.

The confirmation step is deliberately clear about this, and it is worth repeating here:

• The site checks: that a source you cite exists and is itself publishable, that the Section 15 chain is complete, and that the generated notice is well-formed.
• The site does not check: whether your rules content is genuinely Open Game Content, whether you actually hold the rights you represent, or whether a name you used is someone's trademark. Those are your representations, backed by your knowledge of the work — not platform findings.