WotC Talks OGL... Again! Draft Coming Jan 20th With Feedback Survey; v1 De-Auth Still On

Following last week's partial walk-back on the upcoming Open Game Licence terms, WotC has posted another update about the way forward.

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

The new update begins with another apology and a promise to be more transparent. To that end, WotC proposes to release the draft of the new OGL this week, with a two-week survey feedback period following it.


They also list a number of points of clarity --
  • Videos, accessories, VTT content, DMs Guild will not be affected by the new license, none of which is related to the OGL
  • The royalties and ownership rights clauses are, as previously noted, going away
OGL v1 Still Being 'De-Authorized'
However, OGL v1.0a still looks like it's being de-authorized. As with the previous announcement, that specific term is carefully avoided, and like that announcement it states that previously published OGL v1 content will continue to be valid; however it notably doesn't mention that the OGL v1 can be used for content going forward, which is a de-authorization.

The phrase used is "Nothing will impact any content you have published under OGL 1.0a. That will always be licensed under OGL 1.0a." -- as noted, this does not make any mention of future content. If you can't publish future content under OGL 1.0a, then it has been de-authorized. The architect of the OGL, Ryan Dancey, along with WotC itself at the time, clearly indicated that the license could not be revoked or de-authorized.

While the royalty and ownership clauses were, indeed, important to OGL content creators and publishers such as myself and many others, it is also very important not to let that overshadow the main goal: the OGL v1.0a.

Per Ryan Dancey in response this announcement: "They must not. They can only stop the bleeding by making a clear and simple statement that they cannot and will not deauthorize or revoke v1.0a".


Amend At-Will
Also not mentioned is the leaked draft's ability to be amended at-will by WotC. An agreement which can be unilaterally changed in any way by one party is not an agreement, it's a blank cheque. They could simply add the royalties or ownership clauses back in at any time, or add even more onerous clauses.

All-in-all this is mainly just a rephrasing of last week's announcement addressing some of the tonal criticisms widely made about it. However, it will be interesting to see the new draft later this week. I would encourage people to take the feedback survey and clearly indicate that the OGL v1.0a must be left intact.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


log in or register to remove this ad






If it was exactly the same as the OGL v1.0a, except WotC granted themselves unilateral power to terminate anything they wanted based on some ambiguous "anti-bigotry" clause, then we could just ignore it and continue to use the OGL v1.0a, since it would necessarily also have the clause allowing for any previous iteration of the license being available to use.

But judging from what Kyle's statement is very careful not to say, that's not an option WotC wants us to have.

Lets not get caught up in the smokescreen.

This has nothing to do with additional clauses to 'protect the gamers'.
 


Also, Kyle Brink's resume can be found here: https://www.linkedin.com/in/gamesmith/details/experience/

To be clear, this is guy is a videogame designer, and one with his most significant and recent experience running MMOs. Which tells you I think a ton about WotC's goals for D&D.

He also did nearly 5 years at "Viggle" (??!) but explains that he was doing "loyalty and gamification" work on their app. Which again, I think speaks to WotC goals.

He has no working-life TTRPG (or even similar) experience. I'm not here to mock the dude, but if you're hiring people with this kind of background to be EP of D&D (WotC usually seems to only have one at once of those), you have a very specific vision for D&D. And that ain't a vision involving books or being TTRPG as primary part. This is particularly obvious when combined with appointing Dan Rawson to VP of D&D (which would be directly above Kyle I think).
 


Remove ads

Remove ads

Top