The OGL 1.1 is not an Open License

[FrogReaver]

which ones do you consider that to be ?

Probably the large list of product identity in the SRD 5.1 that you aren't allowed to Use (Disribute, Copy, Edit, Format, Modify, Translate and otherwise Create Derivative Material of.

Those actions are only allowed for the Open Game Content that the Copyright holder (WOTC in this case) gets to specify what is product identity and what is Open Game Content.

 

[mamba]

The SRD 5.1 starts out with -

Permission to copy, modify and distribute the files collectively known as the System Reference Document 5.1 ("SRD5") is granted solely through the use of the Open Gaming License, Version 1.0a.

what they will release under 1.1 is not SRD5.1 but a new SRD

 

[FrogReaver]

what they will release under 1.1 is not SRD5.1 but a new SRD

yes, but this has nothing to do with what I replied to Max about.

 

[mamba]

Probably the large list of product identity in the SRD 5.1 that you aren't allowed to Use (Disribute, Copy, Edit, Format, Modify, Translate and otherwise Create Derivative Material of.

Those actions are only allowed for the Open Game Content that the Copyright holder (WOTC in this case) gets to specify what is product identity and what is Open Game Content.

that does not mean the license is not open, only that they did not license this part under it

Any 3PP can do the exact same thing too. You specify what part of your product is covered by the open license and what part is not

 

[darjr]

Is the SRD revocable?

 

[FrogReaver]

Is the SRD revocable?

EDIT: sorry - the below applies to the license agreement.

yes. Section 13 describes how it can be revoked. It's not revocable on WOTC's wim as far as I can tell.

 

[FrogReaver]

that does not mean the license is not open, only that they did not license this part under it

Any 3PP can do the exact same thing too. You specify what part of your product is covered by the open license and what part is not

Generally speaking, a software product would not be called 'open' if part of it couldn't be edited, distributed or used to derive other software with.

 

[FrogReaver]

@darjr - I think you may be talking more about the 'license offer' rather than those already licensed and in general offers can be rescinded at any time. I believe products licensed under the OGL cannot be, because WOTC mandated that the licensees under the OGL would keep including their offer with every distribution of OGC. - though i don't know if this legal theory has ever been tried.

 

[mamba]

Is the SRD revocable?

no, since the license it is under is not revokable

 

[mamba]

Generally speaking, a software product would not be called 'open' if part of it couldn't be edited, distributed or used to derive other software with.

yes, but parts of a software product can be open while other parts can be closed, provided the open license allows for it.

Then the part that is not open is not under an open license, just like not everything D&D is under an open license. This has no bearing on whether the license is open, only on what is covered by it.

This is about the license terms, not about what WotC chose to include / exclude from it.

You are basically arguing that not all of WotC’s D&D products are open, I agree, but I never argued that. I am saying the OGC (Open Game Content) that WotC made available in the SRD is under an open license (the OGL 1.0a)