Hello, I am lawyer with a PSA: almost everyone is wrong about the OGL and SRD. Clearing up confusion.

[Steel_Wind]

is it 5.5 or is it a new system not beholden to the d20 system the ogl or D&D at all?

You taking bets? Your sheep's entrails reading different from mine? We've been down this road before. It's easy to see, because it looks like another fork in the RPG edition road.

"As we look ahead, it becomes even more important for our actions to represent our values. While we wait to see what the future holds, we are moving forward with clear-eyed work on a new Core Fantasy tabletop ruleset: available, open, and subscription-free for those who love it—Code Name: Project Black Flag. "

 

[Steel_Wind]

We don't have that implied covenant of good faith in English law, for most contracts. One reason everyone loves to come to London in their choice of jurisdiction clause.

Yeah, the Supreme Court of Canada is starting to roll their eyes at the English courts now. It used to be that when you cited a decision of the Court of Appeal or H.L. in front of a Canadian court, they would ask counsel why that presumptively would not be followed. It was a very serious question, too.

They don't ask that anymore. After the HL retreated from Anns v. Merton and Canada doubled down on it, we have been increasingly treating the English courts as the old Mum with dementia. After 20 years of "WTF is up with the English?" we don't even ask that anymore, either.

 

[kenada]

If there are things in the System Reference Document that Hasbro doesn't want to share any more (hypothetical example: the Derro), instead of attacking the OGL 1.0, could Hasbro achieve that purpose by releasing a new SRD that includes them in the Product Identity clause? This would make future publishers using the OGL reluctant to use those new additions to PI. Commercial publishers will take the safest course and not use the Derro, even if they think it ought to continue to be reusable.

Not under the OGL 1.0a. Open Game Content can’t be declared Product Identity.

 

[masdog]

I joined just to comment in this thread and ask a few questions after I found this while Googling about the OGL 1.1 stuff. And I've read through all 61(!) pages over the last couple of days (at least it was 61 pages when I started writing this).

First, thanks to @Steel_Wind @bmcdaniel @pemerton @S'mon and others. I know its more "What Ifs" than legal advice (because that requires a retainer, representation agreement, etc) but it has been very informative and I learned more about the intricacies of IP law than I ever wanted to know.

Second, isn't attaching the proposed OGL 1.1 to SRD5.1 effectively creating a derivative product? They would now have two versions - the one that was released under OGL 1.0(a) that has effectively been sublicensed to others, and a new one under the proposed new license?

Edit: Fixing a typo where I had the wrong license version for the SRD. Need more caffeine.

 

[overgeeked]

However I maintain that a reference to section 9 of 1.0a, simply stating that you cannot cross publish from 1.1 to 1.0a. I have yet to see a single argument that this isn't a valid interpretation beyond something like "the entire formulation is totally nonsensical", in which case also the no longer possible to use 1.0a interpretation (beyond for Licenced Content) go out of the window.

All all this speculation and opining is still completely irrelevant. The only thing that actually matters is someone with deep-enough pockets to take WotC to court and win. Short of that, it's all pointless.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

You taking bets? Your sheep's entrails reading different from mine? We've been down this road before. It's easy to see, because it looks like another fork in the RPG edition road.

no that was why I ASKED...

"As we look ahead, it becomes even more important for our actions to represent our values. While we wait to see what the future holds, we are moving forward with clear-eyed work on a new Core Fantasy tabletop ruleset: available, open, and subscription-free for those who love it—Code Name: Project Black Flag. "

that is all i have so far too

 

[GMforPowergamers]

All all this speculation and opining is still completely irrelevant. The only thing that actually matters is someone with deep-enough pockets to take WotC to court and win. Short of that, it's all pointless.

With Kobold doing what they are (see above) we are left waiting on the other big names but no one has said they will challenge this yet.

 

[Micah Sweet]

All all this speculation and opining is still completely irrelevant. The only thing that actually matters is someone with deep-enough pockets to take WotC to court and win. Short of that, it's all pointless.

Unless they back off.

 

[Steel_Wind]

All all this speculation and opining is still completely irrelevant. The only thing that actually matters is someone with deep-enough pockets to take WotC to court and win. Short of that, it's all pointless.

No, I'm sorry -- you have it backwards.

Paizo or Kobold don't have to take WotC to court. They just rely on the 1.0a OGL and do what they want to do. It's WotC who has to run off to court and try to get an injunction. And by now, if you read through 60+ pages here, you should have realized that WotC likely doesn't meet the 3 part test to obtain an injunction.

Which means WotC is the one who is likely screwed -- and it's the defendants who delay the case for years.

 

[Steel_Wind]

With Kobold doing what they are (see above) we are left waiting on the other big names but no one has said they will challenge this yet.

FWIW, Erik Mona was apparently breathing FIRE when he rallied the Paizo troops yesterday at an all staff meeting. They were cheering him on via Facebook, too.

Something's up. We'll wait and see.