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.

WotC Walks Back Some OGL Changes, But Not All

Wizards of the Coast has finally made a statement regarding the OGL. The statement says that the leaked version was a draft designed to solicit feedback and that they are walking back some problematic elements, but don't address others--most notably that the current OGL v1.0a is still being...

www.enworld.org

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".

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...

www.enworld.org

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.

 

[Willie the Duck]

Dear company that just screwed over everyone that they had previously not been screwing over, may we suggest sir that you create a new thing that prevents you from doing what you're doing now in the future?

joe b.

Actually, yes. A new version of the OGL that is exactly like the existing OGL*, but also with a legally-binding 'irrevocable' clause, would be pretty darn optimal.
*with or without some concessions to WotC, depending on your position.

 

[Reynard]

No. But expecting a billion dollar company to lose a legal fight is.

And multiple lawyers have said it is.
There's no consensus. It will depend on the judge and who has more desire to fight.

And, really, WotC doesn't even need to fight. Because for the money a legal battle would take, they could just buy Paizo. Lisa Stevens happily signed off on selling WotC to Hasbro. She might do the same for Paizo.
It wouldn't even cost much. Less than they paid for D&D Beyond.

Multiple actual lawyers weighing in on this debate have repeatedly pointed out that this is not how it works in real life. The deepest pockets don't automatically win.

But keep shifting the goal posts and beating the drum. By tomorrow we should know what WotC's starting position is for these "negotiations."

 

[Vaalingrade]

Such as…?

Less Beatings vouchers.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

The OGL 1.0a is going to go away.

No, it isn’t.

From the OGL 1.1 Q&A leak.

“OGL wasn’t intended to fund major competitors and it wasn’t intended to allow people to make D&D apps, videos, or anything other than printed (or printable) materials for use while gaming. We are updating the OGL in part to make that very clear.”

So the proposed OGL 1.1 deauthorized 1.0a and 1.0, and would have prevented people from making anything other than printed or printable materials. So no VTT, movies, social media videos, tweets, etc.

They have since the outcry and DDB cancellations walked back the social media aspect.

Absolutely every person here is aware of every line of what you just said. What’s your point?

 

[Reynard]

That's what I said.

No major nongaming company can make a good RPG without infringement of an existing. They would have to buy one.

Or, you know, hire a design team.

 

[rknop]

Monte Cook has it right:

Do you have a link to the original (as opposed to a screencapture)?

 

[Maxperson]

No, it isn’t.

Absolutely every person here is aware of every line of what you just said. What’s your point?

Okay, so the conversation you came into was someone asking what sort of compromise between 1.0a and 2.0 could be achieved that might be acceptable to folks. I suggested that since WotC wants control over movies, computer games and VTT, that the new OGL be written as irrevocable and grant people the ability to use written works, PDFs and social media platforms as they did under 1.0a, but reserve movies and video games to WotC. I'm unsure about VTT. I personally don't want WotC to be the only VTT out there, but it seems likely that they won't budge on that.

You then replied to me that the OGL(without specifying which one) allows that. So I responded with the clarification that 1.1 wouldn't allow it, though they've since walked back the social media portion.

 

[reelo]

Do you have a link to the original (as opposed to a screencapture)?

No, because Monte Cook has his tweets protected. You should be able to google a screencap with his name attached though.
Ben Milton of Questing Beast has shared it on yotube too.

 

[Greg Benage]

Actually, yes. A new version of the OGL that is exactly like the existing OGL*, but also with a legally-binding 'irrevocable' clause, would be pretty darn optimal.

They can absolutely create a stronger license, and everyone encourages them to do so. Notably, they can do this without "revoking" or "deauthorizing" the existing license.

 

[mamba]

Cynicism is often realistic.

sounds like a self-fulfilling prophecy to me