Hello, I am lawyer with a PSA: almost everyone is wrong about the OGL and SRD. Clearing up confusion.

[FrogReaver]

That can't be the case. No single party owns all the OGC, and you certainly don't have to use all the OGC. There might exist the possibility that the Contributors are acting collectively in respect to granting you the right to Use the OGC that you're actually Using, but I'm not sure if that's the most plausible interpretation either.

People get 1 license agreement for all OGC. No need for thousands of different agreements.

1 party doesn’t have to own all since all have agreed for their OGC to be licensed under OGL.

 

[mamba]

5.1 SRD. They are distributing OGC.

this is getting circular, you are patently wrong on that. Read the last 5 pages, if you still do not get it, repeat

 

[Maxperson]

5.1 SRD. They are distributing OGC.

It doesn't work that way. The OGL allows OTHERS to use the OGC as presented in SRD 5.1. That's the entire purpose of that license. It does not apply to WotC. They do not have to use it to put out their own content. It's open to OTHERS.

People and companies do not license to themselves. Only to others.

 

[Aspirinsmurf]

[...] attempting to deauthorize the license (another dubious manoeuvre at best)

This appears to be what WotC's current line is, yes. It's not favored by any single one of the lawyers who have spoken on the subject. They're all talking about revocation as a hypothetical possibility instead. "De-authorization" is a non sequitur. I'd love for someone to actually argue otherwise though!

 

[mamba]

People get 1 license agreement for all OGC. No need for thousands of different agreements.

completely wrong, see section 6. The stuff they tell you to add to section 15, those are your individual agreements...

1 party doesn’t have to own all since all have agreed for their OGC to be licensed under OGL.

irrelevant

 

[FrogReaver]

It seems from your responses that you think the OGL licenses to people. It does not. It IS the license. Only WotC can license that material to anyone. OGL 1.0a allows you to sublicense, though.

No. I think the collective contributors do so

 

[FrogReaver]

completely wrong, see section 6. The stuff they tell you to add to section 15, those are your individual agreements...

Section 6 only tells you what to do when you use particular OGC. Sections 2-4 tell you what you are licensed for.

 

[Maxperson]

No. I think the collective contributors do so

None of which applies to any of the 5.1 SRD. I suppose if WotC wanted to use a third party creators product, they would have to do so via the OGL. So if WotC wanted to put out something for Level Up, that might apply. You'd have to ask one of the lawyers how that would work. For their own property, which includes the SRD 5.1, they have no need to license with anyone. They own it.

 

[FrogReaver]

It doesn't work that way. The OGL allows OTHERS to use the OGC as presented in SRD 5.1. That's the entire purpose of that license. It does not apply to WotC. They do not have to use it to put out their own content. It's open to OTHERS.

People and companies do not license to themselves. Only to others.

Yes it does. The OGL makes them a licensee for all OGC by virtue of their distribution of OGC.

 

[mamba]

Section 6 only tells you what to do when you use particular OGC. Sections 2-4 tell you what you are licensed for.

I am not sure I follow your distinction here. You license OGC, duh, obviously. But that is not one amorphous mass, it is individual pieces of OGC from different authors. And 6 tells you that you need to list them in 15 because you are sublicensing their individual work. That they all agree to this is due to them all using the OGL, but that still makes this individual agreements