My thoughts on the new OGL v1.2 draft

[xiphumor]

I would never count on WotC losing. Given the way some judges rule, they could just as easy score massive victories.

The nice thing is that became of the leak, WotC would be sued by other creators first for trying to deauthorize the OGL rather than it going to court because WotC sued some poor sap, which helps frame what’s at issue in the case.

 

[Morrus]

The other thing, mentioned the the twitter thread above that @Aspirinsmurf posted is that, if WOTC "de-authorizes" the old OGL, what exactly happens to all the other non-WOTC derived open game content that's been used in works?

They'll need to switch to another license. They don't need the OGL, it's just convenient. The ORC or CC or something will do the job. It would be up to the licensors how their licensees should handle that, but it could be covered by a simple announcement.

 

[raniE]

But this may be WotC's Immovable Object. If people can't agree on that point, what then?

Then we don’t buy anything from Hasbro. They need us as customers in order to get revenue to make a profit. We do not need them. We have all the power.

 

[Aspirinsmurf]

The nice thing is that became of the leak, WotC would be sued by other creators first for trying to deauthorize the OGL rather than it going to court because WotC sued some poor sap, which helps frame what’s at issue in the case.

I'm not entirely sure if this is to our advantage. I'd personally much rather get sued as a consumer activist in Norway than having to go against WotC in the US state of Washington.

 

[Aspirinsmurf]

They'll need to switch to another license. They don't need the OGL, it's just convenient. The ORC or CC or something will do the job. It would be up to the licensors how their licensees should handle that, but it could be covered by a simple announcement.

There are orphaned works entangled in those ecosystems. So this is impossible. It's a nuclear wasteland at that point.

 

[pemerton]

The other thing, mentioned the the twitter thread above that @Aspirinsmurf posted is that, if WOTC "de-authorizes" the old OGL, what exactly happens to all the other non-WOTC derived open game content that's been used in works?

Are you referring to OGC that is in some fashion derived from a WotC-owned SRD?

Or to OGC that is part of a completely separate ecology (eg Mongoose Traveller; Evil Hat Fate).

First case: it is possible that use of the derived material, in the absence of a licence, could make a publisher liable for infringing WotC's copyright.

Second case: WotC has no contractual relationship to either licensor or licensee. But those two parties have promised one another, under certain circumstances, to reproduce the text of the OGL v 1.0a, over which WotC claims copyright. So fulfilling their contractual obligations to one another may oblige them to infringe WotC's copyright. But there are probably arguments available that they enjoy some sort of express or implicit permission from WotC to reproduce the text of the OGL v 1.0a (eg based on WotC's conduct encouraging other parties to join the open RPG movement).

 

[eyeheartawk]

They'll need to switch to another license. They don't need the OGL, it's just convenient. The ORC or CC or something will do the job. It would be up to the licensors how their licensees should handle that, but it could be covered by a simple announcement.

Right, but if say OGL 1.0a is "de-authorized" and nobody challenges it and it becomes the de-facto state of affairs, and you switch to ORC, wouldn't all the open game content from others you use and cite, right now, in your game (if any, I don't actually know) need to also switch to ORC and re-designate the same content as open game content?

How else could that work?

 

[Aspirinsmurf]

Are you referring to OGC that is in some fashion derived from a WotC-owned SRD?

Or to OGC that is part of a completely separate ecology (eg Mongoose Traveller; Evil Hat Fate).

The former.

 

[eyeheartawk]

Or to OGC that is part of a completely separate ecology (eg Mongoose Traveller; Evil Hat Fate).

Right, sure, completely unrelated to WOTC so Mongoose, or some other guy who made a brand new Psionic Power in a different 3PP book who then designated it as open game content and you use it in your 3pp book and cite it as used open game content, as is the standard now.

 

[pemerton]

The former.

Right, sure, completely unrelated to WOTC so Mongoose, or some other guy who made a brand new Psionic Power in a different 3PP book who then designated it as open game content and you use it in your 3pp book and cite it as used open game content, as is the standard now.

Aspirinsmurf: see my post re first case.

eyeheartawk: see my post re second case.