WotC Unveils Draft of New Open Gaming License

As promised earlier this week, WotC has posted the draft OGL v.1.2 license for the community to see.

A survey will be going live tomorrow for feedback.

Starting the OGL ‘Playtest’

In this article, you can review a draft of OGL 1.2, submit feedback via survey, and learn about a Creative Commons license that puts D&D's core mech...

www.dndbeyond.com

The current iteration contains clauses which prohibit offensive content, applies only to TTRPG books and PDFs, no right of ownership going to WotC, and an optional creator content badge for your products.

One important element, the ability for WotC to change the license at-will has also been addressed, allowing the only two specific changes they can make -- how you cite WotC in your work, and contact details.

This license will be irrevocable.

The OGL v1.0a is still being 'de-authorized'.

 

[Parmandur]

I gotta say we are in a surreal world where someone can say D&D business effects Hasbro stock and they may have a valid point.

If something is talked about byBf8z News and CNBC, like thisnis now, it will have an effect.

However...looking at the broader trend line it may not be a huge effect...particularly now that Hasbro is taking control of the narrative.

 

[Aspirinsmurf]

Yes, because they created something that they have copyright to.

Legally? Sure. But ethically, it sure looks like they're stealing from the public commons. Without going into a huge philosophical debate about that, I'm sure you can see how our poor owlbear might meet a similar fate as Cinderella, no matter what its originators might want to claim.

 

[Sacrosanct]

the 5% drop this week did not... in fact I'd say most of it is a direct consequence of this

That's speculation that doesn't line up with all the other reasons we do know that causes stock price to drop. There's no evidence to say the two are correlated, especially when you look at how the market in general did the same thing. Did the stock at NextEra Energy Inc also drop because of the OGL news?

 

[mamba]

As it stands, this draft says a compliant publication contains only WotC's content and your content.

where?

 

[rcade]

Disney straight up steals from fairy tales in the public domain and claim it as their IP. What's your point?

There's no such thing as stealing from the public domain. Anyone can retell public domain stories. Disney's only IP in that situation is whatever unique they've introduced in their retelling.

Which brings me back to the owlbear, which is just an owl-bear hybrid copied from a toy. There's very little protectible IP in that concept.

 

[Aspirinsmurf]

There's no such thing as stealing from the public domain. Anyone can retell public domain stories. Disney's only IP in that situation is whatever unique they've introduced in their retelling.

Which brings me back to the owlbear, which is just an owl-bear hybrid copied from a toy. There's very little protectible IP in that concept.

Legally, yes. But in practice, this sort of thing leads to chilling effects.

 

[mamba]

Some people have different lines. I want 3pp to be able to keep producing works based on the existing SRDs without interference, you know, like everyone did for the last 20 years and reasonably assumed (due to written assurances from WotC) they could do in perpetuity until a couple weeks ago. Can they do that under this new license?

Never claimed that everyone has the same line. As to use existing SRDs, if anyone would actually answer why the 3e SRD is still needed, I'd probably join in, but since either no one can or no one wants to, I see no point in fighting for it. This is the third time I am asking for why it is needed now in this thread... would be nice if I got an answer and not just 'we need it'

 

[Ruin Explorer]

This is still not an OGL.

There's no share-alike, there's no OGC.

On top of that, the fact that WotC is the sole determinant of what is "hateful" and there's no recourse whatsoever when they get it wrong is just not okay, because they will get it wrong, it's only a matter of time, before Transgender Katana Mice or whatever gets banned.

Apart from those two fairly huge things this is a pretty hilarious climbdown.

 

[Parmandur]

Legally? Sure. But ethically, it sure looks like they're stealing from the public commons. Without going into a huge philosophical debate about that, I'm sure you can see how our poor owlbear might meet a similar fate as Cinderella, no matter what its originators might want to claim.

I mean, that is assuming a lot there, and is out of bounds here anyways. This is about the law as it is, not the broader philosophical question of ownership.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Honestly, no, you're not clear. Are we banned from debating what is bigotry, or banned from discussing the section in the new OGL that discusses banning harmful content?

1) Let’s start with this explicit text.

Consider bigotry in RPGs a “third rail” in the OGL discussions: I see it, you get threadbanned.

2) While we’ve literally had dozens of threads on ENWorld the past couple of years that explicitly distinguish between intentional, unintentional, and negligent inclusion of bigoted material in RPGs- with some posters doing exceptionally good work at connecting the dots- the topic itself is not forbidden.

Realize, of course, that discussion of such will draw intense scrutiny from both fellow ENWorlders and possibly the moderators, depending on how participants comport themselves. And espousing known falsehoods and discredited positions will be dealt with.