• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

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 deauthorized. Non-TTRPG mediums such as "educational and charitable campaigns, livestreams, cosplay...

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 deauthorized.
  • Non-TTRPG mediums such as "educational and charitable campaigns, livestreams, cosplay, VTT-uses" are unaffected by the new license.
  • The 'we can use your content for any reason' provision is going away
  • The royalties aspect is also being removed
  • Content previously released under OGL v1.0a can still be sold, but the statement on that is very short and seems to imply that new content must still use OGL v1.1. This is still a 'de-authorization' of the current OGL.
  • They don't mention the 'reporting revenue' aspect, or the 'we can change this in any way at 30 days notice' provision; of course nobody can sign a contract which can be unilaterally changed by one party.
  • There's still no mention of the 'share-a-like' aspect which defines an 'open' license.
The statement can be read below. While it does roll back some elements, the fact remains that the OGL v1.0a is still being de-authorized.

D&D historian Benn Riggs (author of Slaying the Dragon) made some comments on WotC's declared intentions -- "This is a radical change of the original intention of the OGL. The point of the OGL was to get companies to stop making their own games and start making products for D&D. WoTC execs spent a ton of time convincing companies like White Wolf to make OGL products."

Linda Codega on Gizmodo said "For all intents and purposes, the OGL 1.1 that was leaked to the press was supposed to go forward. Wizards has realized that they made a mistake and they are walking back numerous parts of the leaked OGL 1.1..."

Ryan Dancey, architect of the original OGL commented "They made an announcement today that they're altering their trajectory based on pressure from the community. This is still not what we want. We want Hasbro to agree not to ever attempt to deauthorize v1.0a of the #OGL. Your voices are being heard, and they matter. We're providing visible encouragement and support to everyone inside Wizards of the Coast fighting for v1.0a. It matters. Knowing we're here for them matters. Keep fighting!"


Screen Shot 2023-01-09 at 10.45.12 AM.png

When we initially conceived of revising the OGL, it was with three major goals in mind. First, we wanted the ability to prevent the use of D&D content from being included in hateful and discriminatory products. Second, we wanted to address those attempting to use D&D in web3, blockchain games, and NFTs by making clear that OGL content is limited to tabletop roleplaying content like campaigns, modules, and supplements. And third, we wanted to ensure that the OGL is for the content creator, the homebrewer, the aspiring designer, our players, and the community—not major corporations to use for their own commercial and promotional purpose.

Driving these goals were two simple principles: (1) Our job is to be good stewards of the game, and (2) the OGL exists for the benefit of the fans. Nothing about those principles has wavered for a second.

That was why our early drafts of the new OGL included the provisions they did. That draft language was provided to content creators and publishers so their feedback could be considered before anything was finalized. In addition to language allowing us to address discriminatory and hateful conduct and clarifying what types of products the OGL covers, our drafts included royalty language designed to apply to large corporations attempting to use OGL content. It was never our intent to impact the vast majority of the community.

However, it’s clear from the reaction that we rolled a 1. It has become clear that it is no longer possible to fully achieve all three goals while still staying true to our principles. So, here is what we are doing.

The next OGL will contain the provisions that allow us to protect and cultivate the inclusive environment we are trying to build and specify that it covers only content for TTRPGs. That means that other expressions, such as educational and charitable campaigns, livestreams, cosplay, VTT-uses, etc., will remain unaffected by any OGL update. Content already released under 1.0a will also remain unaffected.

What it will not contain is any royalty structure. It also will not include the license back provision that some people were afraid was a means for us to steal work. That thought never crossed our minds. Under any new OGL, you will own the content you create. We won’t. Any language we put down will be crystal clear and unequivocal on that point. The license back language was intended to protect us and our partners from creators who incorrectly allege that we steal their work simply because of coincidental similarities . As we continue to invest in the game that we love and move forward with partnerships in film, television, and digital games, that risk is simply too great to ignore. The new OGL will contain provisions to address that risk, but we will do it without a license back and without suggesting we have rights to the content you create. Your ideas and imagination are what makes this game special, and that belongs to you.

A couple of last thoughts. First, we won’t be able to release the new OGL today, because we need to make sure we get it right, but it is coming. Second, you’re going to hear people say that they won, and we lost because making your voices heard forced us to change our plans. Those people will only be half right. They won—and so did we.

Our plan was always to solicit the input of our community before any update to the OGL; the drafts you’ve seen were attempting to do just that. We want to always delight fans and create experiences together that everyone loves. We realize we did not do that this time and we are sorry for that. Our goal was to get exactly the type of feedback on which provisions worked and which did not–which we ultimately got from you. Any change this major could only have been done well if we were willing to take that feedback, no matter how it was provided–so we are. Thank you for caring enough to let us know what works and what doesn’t, what you need and what scares you. Without knowing that, we can’t do our part to make the new OGL match our principles. Finally, we’d appreciate the chance to make this right. We love D&D’s devoted players and the creators who take them on so many incredible adventures. We won’t let you down.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


log in or register to remove this ad

rcade

Hero
I was kind of "team hasbro" this whole time. Does this statement do anything to resolve the issues people had? Removing the royalty structure, confirming that stuff previously released under 1.0a stays licensed, and clarifying the owenership of content seems to solve what most of the issues. Is it just the issue with character creator and combat management apps that remains?
No. There are big issues that were not addressed. One is that people should be able to continue to build on existing products created under OGL 1.0. The entire corpus of content derived from the SRD over the past 23 years should not be yanked out of the commons.
 

Jer

Legend
Supporter
From their article:

Content already released under 1.0a will also remain unaffected. .

This is insufficiently vague. By one reading this invalidates new material coming out for existing games even if the existing products for those games can continue to be sold.

For example, Mutants and Masterminds is under the OGL 1.0a. Under that reading they wouldn't be able to release new content for the game even if they don't incorporate anything new because only content already released would be "unaffected".

They are not clearly saying "we're not trying to revoke the OGL 1.0a and we consider the license for anything released under it to date unrevocable - it's just that all new content will be under OGL 1.1". And it's so easy to say that. Anything less than that leaves open the possibility that they'll rip the industry apart just because they can. This suggests that they still don't understand what they've done with this nonsense and why 100% clarity is needed if they want people to calm down about their intentions at this point.

And to be clear - they were able to provide EXACTLY that clarity when they decided to ditch the OGL for 4e and go with their GSL license instead. It was very clear that if you wanted to use the new rules, you needed to use the GSL. So they have an example of how to do the misguided thing they want to do in a way that doesn't revoke or invalidate the 1.0a version of the license and can see all the ways it failed the last time they tried it. Which is why I don't trust that that's what they mean with this single sentence, btw. Because they did the charitable read of this sentence once before and it failed, but they haven't tried the uncharitable read yet and that might work.
 





SkidAce

Legend
Supporter
This is still a negotiation, but I'd bet this will end up with One D&D removing itself from being an Open system, and instead ending up with a 4e like GSL. Honestly, while it may have been premature to take that step with 4e, it is likely in the best interest of all parties for One to take that step now. True Open gaming will continue with ORC (or something equivalent). One may have to make substantial changes to it's design, perhaps to the point that it is not directly compatible with 5.1 for WotC to achieve it's other goals, and that might be okay. The best thing will be for the GSL to be a fair deal for those wishing to created closed content for D&D, which what they are outlining appears to be stepping closer to.
Most likely accurate forecast I've heard so far.
 


OB1

Jedi Master
Goals:


None of these goals are achievable unless Wizards can revoke OGL 1.0a, and no 3PP with any real stake will use an OGL that Wizards can revoke.

Now what?

"However, it’s clear from the reaction that we rolled a 1. It has become clear that it is no longer possible to fully achieve all three goals while still staying true to our principles."
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top