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 not have the power to deauthorize a version of the OGL. If that had been a power that we wanted to reserve for Hasbro, we would have enumerated it in the license. I am on record numerous places in email and blogs and interviews saying that the license could never be revoked.

Ryan also maintains the Open Gaming Foundation.

As has been noted previously, even WotC in its own OGL FAQ did not believe at the time that the licence could be revoked.

7. Can't Wizards of the Coast change the License in a way that I wouldn't like?

Yes, it could. However, the License already defines what will happen to content that has been previously distributed using an earlier version, in Section 9. As a result, even if Wizards made a change you disagreed with, you could continue to use an earlier, acceptable version at your option. In other words, there's no reason for Wizards to ever make a change that the community of people using the Open Gaming License would object to, because the community would just ignore the change anyway.

​

 

[GMforPowergamers]

A monster stat block is what you use the to play the game. It’s obviously mechanics. Any new traps in an adventure? Treasures? NPC stats? Those are made of mechanics too. If there is non-mechanical stuff you want to protect, that is what PI declarations are for. Paizo is a good model for how to do this.

Man I WISH it was that cut and dry, and if the Mayfair games TSR thing had a more definitive ending we MIGHT have an answer.

I made up 6 stats (aka the same ones) roll a d20 add mod try for a DC...but I don't have the guts to TRY to see if it gets a C&D

 

[GMforPowergamers]

One can always find a person to say something stupid. If they go forward with such bad advice WotC will be creamated and buried in Federal court

maybe

I am no lawyer (I need a hot key for that this weekkend) but I know that if a lawyer can make a solid argument (And we have seen on this very board some can) they can win. Again it comes down to who has a better legal team, and my money is on Hasbro.

If I were running Piazo,, or advising them as accountant, I would say "Lets run the numbers what it would cost us to litigate this in theory for 1 year and for 2 years. Then we send the person WotC likes best with terms of how WE want a special contract for 5 or 10 years to keep useing pathfinder d20 ect... we will pay X now report income and 2% over that $750k. We start with X being half what it would cost to be in court for a year and if they negotiate we give as little as we can but cap at 5% over the $750 and Y now... where Y is half way between 1 year and 2 year forcast"

 

[Scribe]

maybe

I am no lawyer (I need a hot key for that this weekkend) but I know that if a lawyer can make a solid argument (And we have seen on this very board some can) they can win. Again it comes down to who has a better legal team, and my money is on Hasbro.

If I were running Piazo,, or advising them as accountant, I would say "Lets run the numbers what it would cost us to litigate this in theory for 1 year and for 2 years. Then we send the person WotC likes best with terms of how WE want a special contract for 5 or 10 years to keep useing pathfinder d20 ect... we will pay X now report income and 2% over that $750k. We start with X being half what it would cost to be in court for a year and if they negotiate we give as little as we can but cap at 5% over the $750 and Y now... where Y is half way between 1 year and 2 year forcast"

I still cannot wrap my head around a lawsuit, going against Paizo, which published Pathfinder in (looking) 2009, now in its second edition.

I mean crazier things have happened I'm sure, but this is something thats been in use, and (I assume) unchallenged, for over 13 years...

 

[Morrus]

but not everything I create is OGC, I have to declare it to be that

If it’s derivative of existing OGC it’s OGC whether youndev

maybe

I am no lawyer (I need a hot
I also had the goal that the release of the SRD would ensure that D&D in a format that I felt was true to its legacy could never be removed from the market by capricious decisions by its owners.
key for that this weekkend) but I know that if a lawyer can make a solid argument (And we have seen on this very board some can) they can win. Again it comes down to who has a better legal team, and my money is on Hasbro.

If I were running Piazo,, or advising them as accountant, I would say "Lets run the numbers what it would cost us to litigate this in theory for 1 year and for 2 years. Then we send the person WotC likes best with terms of how WE want a special contract for 5 or 10 years to keep useing pathfinder d20 ect... we will pay X now report income and 2% over that $750k. We start with X being half what it would cost to be in court for a year and if they negotiate we give as little as we can but cap at 5% over the $750 and Y now... where Y is half way between 1 year and 2 year forcast"

I still cannot wrap my head around a lawsuit, going against Paizo, which published Pathfinder in (looking) 2009, now in its second edition.

I mean crazier things have happened I'm sure, but this is something thats been in use, and (I assume) unchallenged, for over 13 years...

Paizo is who are all looking to.

 

[mamba]

A monster stat block is what you use the to play the game. It’s obviously mechanics. Any new traps in an adventure? Treasures? NPC stats? Those are made of mechanics too. If there is non-mechanical stuff you want to protect, that is what PI declarations are for. Paizo is a good model for how to do this.

mechanics to me are rules, a monster stat block is not that, it is a set of values that is only meaningful because of the existing mechanics

Let's turn this around, so any OGL monster book has to include the stats in the OGC automatically?

 

[Alzrius]

Paizo is who are all looking to.

Where have you gone, Paizo Publishing
Us gamers turn our worried eyes to you
Woo woo woo

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I still cannot wrap my head around a lawsuit, going against Paizo, which published Pathfinder in (looking) 2009, now in its second edition.

I mean crazier things have happened I'm sure, but this is something thats been in use, and (I assume) unchallenged, for over 13 years...

I assume (Hotkey: I am not a lawyer but) that nothing could stop them from selling everything published as of today. That is not undoable... it's new books that could get the challenge. The way around it we know for sure is sign the new OGL. MY thought is they need to negotiate better terms and/or get a great lawyer.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I have games that declare basically everything not already OGC as Product Identity (e.g., Pugmire, OSE Advanced Fantasy), and I’m sure there are others. What are the practical consequences? It doesn’t seem like there are any.

Which is somehow unfair... You just take and don't give...

 

[mamba]

If it’s derivative of existing OGC it’s OGC whether youndev

what makes it derivative ? If I create a new monster, is that derivative because it uses the statblock of D&D? If I create a campaign setting, is it derivative because I publish it as a D&D setting? There must be a line somewhere because while maybe the monster is, I very much doubt the setting is.

 

[Morrus]

what makes it derivative ? If I create a new monster, is that derivative because it uses the statblock of D&D? If I create a campaign setting, is it derivative because I publish it as a D&D setting? There must be a line somewhere because while maybe the monster is, I very much doubt the setting is.

That's where your lawyer comes in.