WotC Talks OGL... Again! Draft Coming Jan 20th With Feedback Survey; v1 De-Auth Still On

Following last week's partial walk-back on the upcoming Open Game Licence terms, WotC has posted another update about the way forward.

The new update begins with another apology and a promise to be more transparent. To that end, WotC proposes to release the draft of the new OGL this week, with a two-week survey feedback period following it.

WotC Walks Back Some OGL Changes, But Not All

Wizards of the Coast has finally made a statement regarding the OGL. The statement says that the leaked version was a draft designed to solicit feedback and that they are walking back some problematic elements, but don't address others--most notably that the current OGL v1.0a is still being...

www.enworld.org

They also list a number of points of clarity --

• Videos, accessories, VTT content, DMs Guild will not be affected by the new license, none of which is related to the OGL
• The royalties and ownership rights clauses are, as previously noted, going away

OGL v1 Still Being 'De-Authorized'
However, OGL v1.0a still looks like it's being de-authorized. As with the previous announcement, that specific term is carefully avoided, and like that announcement it states that previously published OGL v1 content will continue to be valid; however it notably doesn't mention that the OGL v1 can be used for content going forward, which is a de-authorization.

The phrase used is "Nothing will impact any content you have published under OGL 1.0a. That will always be licensed under OGL 1.0a." -- as noted, this does not make any mention of future content. If you can't publish future content under OGL 1.0a, then it has been de-authorized. The architect of the OGL, Ryan Dancey, along with WotC itself at the time, clearly indicated that the license could not be revoked or de-authorized.

While the royalty and ownership clauses were, indeed, important to OGL content creators and publishers such as myself and many others, it is also very important not to let that overshadow the main goal: the OGL v1.0a.

Per Ryan Dancey in response this announcement: "They must not. They can only stop the bleeding by making a clear and simple statement that they cannot and will not deauthorize or revoke v1.0a".

Ryan Dancey -- Hasbro Cannot Deauthorize OGL

I reached out to the architect of the original Open Gaming License, former VP of Wizard of the Coast, Ryan Dancey, and asked his opinion about the current plan by WotC to 'deauthorize' the current OGL in favour of a new one. He responded as follows: Yeah my public opinion is that Hasbro does...

www.enworld.org

Amend At-Will
Also not mentioned is the leaked draft's ability to be amended at-will by WotC. An agreement which can be unilaterally changed in any way by one party is not an agreement, it's a blank cheque. They could simply add the royalties or ownership clauses back in at any time, or add even more onerous clauses.

All-in-all this is mainly just a rephrasing of last week's announcement addressing some of the tonal criticisms widely made about it. However, it will be interesting to see the new draft later this week. I would encourage people to take the feedback survey and clearly indicate that the OGL v1.0a must be left intact.

 

[mamba]

How does one kill what is alraedy dead?

after having it turn undead on you

 

[FrogReaver]

I don't understand people that think, that everything big corporations do is screwing you over to get your money.

In USA that is most often based on experience.

I guess the truth is in the middle.

They try to get money by producing something you like. And you actually get what you like bevause someone has the interest of actually inventing those...

No problem with anyone making money, even alot of it. There's a difference in that and screwing over others to make even more money.

Here in Germany we have seen the difference between capitalizm and communism. Guess where people got more of the things they wanted...

Yes. But Germany and the EU also have alot stronger consumer protections than USA. Many of the ways companies screw over their USA customers just don't exist there.

I for my part hate what WotC are doing. But I am grateful that D&D is thriving because for the last 10 years, WotC have done a quite good job as stewards of the game.
I hope this all settles down with a good, irrevocable OGL 1.2 or 2.1 or whatever that makes it a safe haven again.

I'm actually looking forward to the ORC.

 

[darjr]

Can someone screen cap this trying to type this standing in freezing rain.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

“What Americans love about burritos” is pretty far removed from authentic Mexican food. Not to say that it isn’t good, it’s just a different category of cuisine. Though, I suppose we did arrive at this point from talking about American pizza, which is likewise a completely different thing than the Italian food it’s inspired by. So, I guess I’ll concede this point. Anyway, as Latin food goes I prefer Puerto Rican over anything.

I was about to say, what the world loves about pizza is Italian-American pizza, which in turn is dramatically different than purely Italian pizza (which, of course, relies on the New World's tomato) due to the easy availability of meat in the early United States as compared to Italy.

Mexico is an enormous country with a wide and varied cuisine -- very different things are eaten in the Yucatan than are eaten in Mexico City than are eaten in Baja California. But what the US -- and through them, much of the world -- knows is what border communities and immigrants have tweaked to match American palates and available ingredients.

I love authentic food and have repeatedly visited Mexico, but I don't think "authenticity" is inherently better than the fusion cuisine immigrants and border communities create out of necessity. (Again, pizza in any recognizable form wouldn't exist without the Old and New Worlds meeting.)

In any case, the Mission burrito (the overstuffed burrito Americans know and love) is a San Francisco thing (created by Mexicans living in California, which was, itself, Mexico until the border crossed them). San Diego also has a big claim on the American burrito, including the very-American "California burrito," which is crinkle-cut French fries as an ingredient in a burrito. Potatos (papas en Espanol) in burritos were already a thing, but this just tweaked the delivery mechanism.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

This is impossible without revoking OGL 1.0a. OGL 1.0a explicitly allows all of that.

The OGL (all existing, non-"draft" versions) makes reference to authorized versions of the license. WotC is going to claim that that authorization has been withdrawn going forward from whatever date the so-called "Open" Gaming License 2 (or whatever they're calling it now) takes effect.

Like...that's literally what they're doing. They're trying to exploit a crappy probably-non-existent loophole in the way the existing license is worded.

Edit: To be really really specific, this is the relevant section (bolded for emphasis):

9. Updating the License: Wizards or its designated Agents may publish updated versions of this License. You may use any authorized version of this License to copy, modify and distribute any Open Game Content originally distributed under any version of this License.

Their theory, which is a crock of feces, is that this section gives WotC the power to withdraw authorization from any version of this license should they so choose. Hence, things created under OGL 1.0a would still be valid by a grandfather clause in their "O"GL 2, but nothing new could be published under OGL 1.0a because that license would no longer be an authorized license.

Essentially, "O"GL 2 would make exceptions for anything published under prior, non-updated versions of the license, but in so doing, would completely replace and supplant all those prior, non-updated versions.

Or, to put it more simply, "O"GL 2 would in fact revoke OGL 1.0a, but in doing so it would allow all (and only) those works published before its effective date to still operate under the terms of the OGL 1.0a. So it would be revoked, but revived as a zombie for the grandfather clause.

 

[wingsandsword]

What features does this new license even contain that gives WOTC any advantage at this point?

That anything they release from now on will only be released under that license.

It's basically a "if you want to make stuff to support 6th edition, you have to use this license" license.

Nothing more.

It's not any kind of open license, and certainly nothing anybody in their right mind would use for any other purpose.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

That is actually genuinely surprising. I mean, I knew they must read at least some comments, but this sounds like a LOT of time being dedicated to reading survey responses, which seems like a very inefficient use of resources.

I would assume that lower level workers do the bulk of the reading and then they collate the most interesting and/or representative responses that are then passed up the food chain for others to read.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Hypothetical scenario: You're a WOTC employee. You think this whole thing was a stupid, avoidable mistake. But your boss tells you that we really don't know what's going on without actual data because upper level management just thinks it's a handful of malcontents and that a lot of people who are okay with the changes or support some of it are just being shouted out of the conversation. WOTC dude calls the bluff and says "Okay, let's do a survey and get real feedback."

Is that hypothetical accurate? Heck if I know. It has just as much validity as the "buying time" statements being passed around. Unless there's a recording of what's going on in WOTC offices right now, we simply don't know. I plan on reading the proposed change and giving honest feedback. If it's a waste of my time and they ignore it, so be it. But if there's even a chance that they'll listen to honest and thought-out feedback I think it's worth the effort.

Even if it starts as a bad faith effort, that's not to say that the feedback won't end up being useful. The situation is fluid. I wouldn't count on any of the current execs being in the same positions by the time the survey closes. The next person could be much more open to listening to the players.

Look, everyone here are D&D players: Your DM letting you roll a percentile die to effect change on a 100 is still preferable to not having a chance at all.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

There's not really any question of which branch of the pizza tree is best thought. American pizza is good, but Pizza Napolitana is the best food in the world!

Reporting the heck out of this post!

 

[The Sigil]

If the ruling came down for WOTC it would still be better. Heck I wish OGL 1.0a had never happened in the first place.
It was bad for the hobby! That is the point our hobby got distorted into what it is today. Our hobby used to have hundreds of rpg's based on imaginative and truly unique ideas. Then WOTC conquered everyone by opening up their rule set so EVERYONE could abandon their own ideas and come feast on the OGL.

I dunno, I picked up RPGs in the early 80's and I tried a lot of RPGs in the early 90s.

While I have fond memories of some of the settings, I have less-fond memories of the mechanics and in fact felt that oftentimes clunky mechanics made an otherwise-interesting setting something I wasn't interested in playing. Sometimes mechanics do a really good job of enhancing the setting but in my experience, "Good Setting, Bad Mechanics" is a lot more prevalent than "Bad Setting, Good Mechanics" (and even more rare is "Good Setting, Good Mechanics") and I do wonder how many really "mechanically solid" systems are really out there in the design space; for example, there's only a limited number of ways to build a system designed around rolling only d10's.