• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

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. 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...

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

Maybe not everyone is a lawyer or logician or the like. And so the statement in their last announcement can easily be understood.
I think communicating in clear ways is better than speaking in legalese on dndbeyond. On friday we will see the legalese version of it. Which looks like a good timeframe.

Yes, it is only the legalese which can be understood in any meaningful way. All other communication is comparatively unimportant.

However, what I expect is that the legalease in the 2.0 document to, sadly, not actually answer the question regarding the mechanism in which legacy products are considered licensed but not licensed enough to allow for new content to be created from them. I expect that to be deliberately left vauge because the goal isn't for clarity to exist, but for confusion and uncertainty. I would love to be wrong, and really hope that I am.

joe b.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

J.Quondam

CR 1/8
I see more dodgy things. First and foremost, 3pp producers who now make the ORC certainly don't act out of altruism...
Wait what? What makes you suspect this? Their intent is to make a truly open license for RPG creators to use, and hand it over to a neutral (and iirc, a non-profit) custodian.
 


Haplo781

Legend
Does it allow for reprinting of already-published books? I'm not sure how to interpret "already published". Can Necrotic Gnome order another print run of Old School Essentials and keep selling it under 1.0a?
At a guess? Yes, but you can't publish new products for existing game lines, even if those lines were published under 1.0a.

So you can keep publishing all the extant OSE products, but you can't create new books under the OSE line.

It's a slow death rather than an immediate one.
 

Haplo781

Legend
Yes. Quite dodgy. At that point I think we should take every leak woth a grain of salt. While some leaks proved to be mostly true, noone knows if the rest are too. Now everything is so heated, that some people might just delight putting oil in the fire.

I see more dodgy things. First and foremost, 3pp producers who now make the ORC certainly don't act out of altruism...
LOL based on what exactly?
 


DarkCrisis

Reeks of Jedi
Yes. Quite dodgy. At that point I think we should take every leak woth a grain of salt. While some leaks proved to be mostly true, noone knows if the rest are too. Now everything is so heated, that some people might just delight putting oil in the fire.

I see more dodgy things. First and foremost, 3pp producers who now make the ORC certainly don't act out of altruism...
But a guy in a youtube video said it! It must be true. He has a source! The only trust tier higher is a Tik Tok video.
 

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
Yes. Quite dodgy. At that point I think we should take every leak woth a grain of salt. While some leaks proved to be mostly true, noone knows if the rest are too. Now everything is so heated, that some people might just delight putting oil in the fire.
I mean, I’m not commenting on the veracity of the leaks. I’m just saying “WotC doesn’t read the written feedback in the surveys” isn’t even a leak. It’s just… common knowledge, or at least it should be. They care about satisfaction rating, and if it’s low, they care about trends in why people are reporting dissatisfaction. To that end, they might read some of the written responses, or more likely run a search for keywords in them. Anyone surprised by this just doesn’t have a very good grasp of this kind of mass data analysis.
I see more dodgy things. First and foremost, 3pp producers who now make the ORC certainly don't act out of altruism...
I mean, the creation of the ORC is undoubtedly a business decision. But it seems likely to be a business decision that benefits consumers, just as the original OGL was.
 


This is not a charitable view. People are hurting because a large corporation is doing something which actively harms them. I, myself, am worried for my mortgage, and those of the people who depend on me. Maybe let us vent a little, eh? If it bothers you, don't read it, but our livelihoods are at stake here, and your mild inconvenience at being bothered by seeing other peoples' suffering isn't a priority. There are plenty of other threads you can read.

While I understand this 100%
there are people wishing wotc to fail which would equally harm people who are equally at the whim of some hasbro/wotc leaders (especially if the leaks are true).

So lets all hope for a good ending where noone has to shut down anything. Lets take the anouncement at a positive sign that negotiation channels are actually open. There is probably still time to bring forth pitchfork and torches if the new draft on friday is still am insult.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top