Battlezoo Shares The OGL v1.1

Battlezoo, the YouTube channel which shared the initial leak of the new Open Game License, has shared the PDF of the OGL v1.1 draft which is currently circulating. This draft is, presumably, the same document obtained by Gizmodo last week. It's not currently known if this is the final version of the license.

​

 

[Charlaquin]

I think that's one case they would lose under the idea that you can copyright text, but you cannot copyright mechanics.

Is that game mechanics though? Clearly having a numeric value that determines a modifier to chance of success on certain actions is a game mechanic. But Strength, Dexterity, Constitution, Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma, and what specific actions each of those values modify? I think a solid argument could be made that’s a specific expression of the mechanic, and therefore under copyright. There’s at least enough there to make a case, which may be enough to keep potential competitors from risking using them. And that’s just one example, meant to illustrate the difficulty of sorting out mechanics from their presentation in an RPG.

 

[sigfried]

This is not the actual license.

Regardless, this isn't the text of the license. The links which went to the text of the actual license were removed, because in theory that leak could be traced back to the source. So they only includes this weird commentary help document which is talking about the license without showing the license real text.

Eh, it's not totally clear to me. There are sections clearly labeled as being commentary, and others that are numbered and written such that they appear to be a contract and which refer to themselves as a license agreement.

An example: V. LEVELING UP UNDER THIS AGREEMENT. This agreement covers all commercial uses, whether they’re profitable or not.

Another: c. it contains the text of this OGL: Non-Commercial within the body of the work.

If nothing else, it is portraying itself as an agreement (aka contract aka license) and the fact it specifically notes that certain parts are not part of the agreement strongly implies the other parts are.

You may be correct, and this was just written in a way in which it is super confusing by keeping actual agreement language in an explanation of the agreement... but I think it is likely indeed a mix of the actual language with commentary intermixed in it where indicated. I suspect the linked agreements are E-Sign or Sign and send copies and this is a document meant to paint it in the best light possible. (and failing miserably at that aim)

 

[Greg K]

Haw! No, I was definitely around when the OGL first came out. You're mistaking me asking some questions for me stating my opinion. Easy enough to do. I had yet to make up my mind on the subject (hence the questions), but I'm coming around.

. Easy to do online.

 

[sigfried]

Is that game mechanics though? Clearly having a numeric value that determines a modifier to chance of success on certain actions is a game mechanic. But Strength, Dexterity, Constitution, Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma, and what specific actions each of those values modify? I think a solid argument could be made that’s a specific expression of the mechanic, and therefore under copyright.

Yep, there is not a bright line between what's a "process" and what is a unique expression of a process. (the body of law tends to use that language more than "rules" from what I understand)

In court, it would come down to who makes the more compelling case and how the judge or jury could be made to understand the distinction between a process and a work of art expressing the process. That and arguments over whether Strength, as it is represented in D&D, is a unique creation or just a common term for a commonplace idea.

Also, how close are the circumstances of this case to cases on this matter that have already been decided.

Bottom line is, the more points of similarity your game has with D&D propper (or in this case the SRD) the tougher it is to show it is not a derivative work under copyright law.

 

[Charlaquin]

Yep, there is not a bright line between what's a "process" and what is a unique expression of a process. (the body of law tends to use that language more than "rules" from what I understand)

In court, it would come down to who makes the more compelling case and how the judge or jury could be made to understand the distinction between a process and a work of art expressing the process. That and arguments over whether Strength, as it is represented in D&D, is a unique creation or just a common term for a commonplace idea.

Also, how close are the circumstances of this case to cases on this matter that have already been decided.

Bottom line is, the more points of similarity your game has with D&D propper (or in this case the SRD) the tougher it is to show it is not a derivative work under copyright law.

Yep. Which is why “you can’t copyright game mechanics” is not the ironclad defense some people seem to think it is.

 

[ersatzphil]

I know several YouTubers are moving away from discussing 5e. Arcane Library is scrubbing their Kickstarter of OGL material, Dungeon Craft will not be talking anymore about 5e or OneD&D (instead, focusing soley upon OSR and Indie games), and Dungeon Coach has announced transitioning from 5e to system agnostic).

As a fan of both Arcane Library and Dungeon Craft, I have to admit it's bewildering - not on their end, mind you, but - who thought this was a good idea? Having fewer people talking about your game?

 

[JEB]

As a fan of both Arcane Library and Dungeon Craft, I have to admit it's bewildering - not on their end, mind you, but - who thought this was a good idea? Having fewer people talking about your game?

I think we have to assume they didn't expect such a widespread negative reaction to OGL 1.1, especially among D&D influencers.

 

[GreyLord]

Is that game mechanics though? Clearly having a numeric value that determines a modifier to chance of success on certain actions is a game mechanic. But Strength, Dexterity, Constitution, Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma, and what specific actions each of those values modify? I think a solid argument could be made that’s a specific expression of the mechanic, and therefore under copyright. There’s at least enough there to make a case, which may be enough to keep potential competitors from risking using them. And that’s just one example, meant to illustrate the difficulty of sorting out mechanics from their presentation in an RPG.

Not exactly a copy, but example one from the 80s...see Final Fantasy I.

 

[bedir than]

I think we have to assume they didn't expect such a widespread negative reaction to OGL 1.1, especially among D&D influencers.

Those influencers are also going to lose. No matter what non-D&D topic in ttrpg they talk about their audience dramatically shrinks.

 

[ersatzphil]

Those influencers are also going to lose. No matter what non-D&D topic in ttrpg they talk about their audience dramatically shrinks.

As someone else pointed out, WotC may be perfectly happy with a bigger piece of a smaller pie.