The new OGL 1.2, What is Victory?


log in or register to remove this ad

A huge grey area. Thats fair. Though if you cite, say, OSRIC (Sic?), you use elements of WotC SRD under 1.2 also in OSRIC, and by design the Keepers of OSRIC shouldn't care, does it matter?
I'm not talking about OSRIC. I'm talking about old OOP books from the 2000s and not having to scrub them of any Owlbear™'s because Hasbro decided to illegally violate a contract in order to reclaim IP that they've already put out under a CC-like license.
 

Dausuul

Legend
The more I look at this new proposal, the more dubious it gets. At first I thought it seemed like a workable framework even if some details still needed fixing. Now... I'm less sure. The number of ramifications popping up is unsettling.

On the other hand... this document explicitly states that 1.0a remains in force for works already published under it. Which, if I'm reading it correctly (would welcome correction by a lawyer), would seem to mean the sublicensing provision also remains in force and anyone can safely sublicense from, say, d20srd.org.
 

The more I look at this new proposal, the more dubious it gets. At first I thought it seemed like a workable framework even if some details still needed fixing. Now... I'm less sure. The number of ramifications popping up is unsettling.

On the other hand... this document explicitly states that 1.0a remains in force for works already published under it. Which, if I'm reading it correctly (would welcome correction by a lawyer), would seem to mean the sublicensing provision also remains in force and anyone can safely sublicense from, say, d20srd.org.
Do you trust Wizbro not to come after you if you try? Because that's the core of the issue. WotC had trust. There was a 22-year ceasefire over this sort of thing. And now WotC's thrown all that away because it wants to chase VTT money, and wouldn't mind an easy case of SLAPPing a small fry down just to prove their might.
 

MoonSong

Rules-lawyering drama queen but not a munchkin
To me victory includes

They leave existing 1.0 as is. I don't care if they remove 5.1 from the offer. That is fine I guess.
They can keep 1.2 as is, but with the morality clause amended to be less damaging and no longer all-or-nothing, and without the contractual purity thing.
The CC stuff is gravy.
 

I think we all have to find our own lines in the sand...
Sure
not great but I am kind of the mind that this is not on the table to negotiate... this is coming 1 way or another so I except it. (I am not sure if it matters with the CC reopen though)
It can be on the table if enough of us insist that it be on the table.

I am a big proponent of this... I think it could use some fine tuning but I am overall happy
Are you going to be a proponent of this 20 years from now when somebody whose ethos and morals you disagree with is in charge of Hasbro? Wielding the power, that this license grants them?

Across the political spectrum, power corrupts, it is only a matter of time. The only solution is to lock up the clubs and knives and remove the ability for any of us to coerce each other's creative decisions. I don't desire that power over anybody, nor should anybody be given that power.

I do not like to bring up my experience with Judges Guild, but I felt was important in this instance to show that as a community we do not need Wizard's help in cleaning up our problems. We can take care of it ourselves.



okay, those are your lines.
Yes they are, I hope they become your lines as well, but if you decide differently that is fine.
 


Dausuul

Legend
Do you trust Wizbro not to come after you if you try? Because that's the core of the issue. WotC had trust. There was a 22-year ceasefire over this sort of thing. And now WotC's thrown all that away because it wants to chase VTT money, and wouldn't mind an easy case of SLAPPing a small fry down just to prove their might.
Wizards can always do that. Nothing can stop Wizards filing a lawsuit against anybody for anything. They can sue me on the grounds that the sky is blue.

However, doing so won't get them very far, since they will quickly end up in front of a judge wanting to know what law or contract is being violated by the color of the sky and what any of this has to do with me. Defending that lawsuit is not going to cost me much at all, no matter how much high-priced legal talent WotC throws at it.

So that's the question. How much easier, if any, does it become to defend a lawsuit over the OGL if Wizards has already agreed that my licensor's copy of the OGL is still in force? Honest question, I don't know.
 

Wizards can always do that. Nothing can stop Wizards filing a lawsuit against anybody for anything. They can sue me on the grounds that the sky is blue.

However, doing so won't get them very far, since they will quickly end up in front of a judge wanting to know what law or contract is being violated by the color of the sky and what any of this has to do with me. Defending that lawsuit is not going to cost me much at all, no matter how much high-priced legal talent WotC throws at it.

So that's the question. How much easier, if any, does it become to defend a lawsuit over the OGL if Wizards has already agreed that my licensor's copy of the OGL is still in force? Honest question, I don't know.
Easy if you can get in front of a judge. Expensive to get there. And I'd hope you make it, too, but it likely means all your potential profits from the book would go the lawyers, leaving that victory kind of hollow. Which is the entire problem with this situation.
 

Greggy C

Hero
I am pretty sure wizards could change nothing, and just give away their entire IP, and people would still be upset.

I think at this point, your average player is going to lose interest in this fight, wizards walked back everything except for a small portion that few people really care about, except for the vocal minority of creators.
 

Remove ads

Top