Did we ever get to see the OGL v2.0?

[Alzrius]

So looking back over the drama of the last few weeks, there seems to have been three different OGL iterations floated by WotC.

The first one was the OGL v1.1, which was characterized as a draft (despite several third-party companies being asked to sign it; a "final draft" perhaps?).

The third one was the OGL v1.2, which was an actual draft, along with the proposed VTT policy in the same PDF document.

But the second one, the OGL 2.0, never seems to have been anything other than an FAQ, and from what I can tell even that never actually made it to the public at large. It was only ever a leak to certain outlets, who subsequently reviewed it and sent out the tidbits they learned. Or at least, that's what I can find after some Googling; is that actually the case? Did we ever get a downloadable document of the OGL v2.0, or its FAQ?

 

[mellored]

No.

The feedback on 1.2 was so strong, they just used creative commons.

 

[JEB]

So looking back over the drama of the last few weeks, there seems to have been three different OGL iterations floated by WotC.

The first one was the OGL v1.1, which was characterized as a draft (despite several third-party companies being asked to sign it; a "final draft" perhaps?).

The third one was the OGL v1.2, which was an actual draft, along with the proposed VTT policy in the same PDF document.

But the second one, the OGL 2.0, never seems to have been anything other than an FAQ, and from what I can tell even that never actually made it to the public at large. It was only ever a leak to certain outlets, who subsequently reviewed it and sent out the tidbits they learned. Or at least, that's what I can find after some Googling; is that actually the case? Did we ever get a downloadable document of the OGL v2.0, or its FAQ?

My guess is they had planned to do iterative "updates" to OGL 1.0 (1.1, 1.2), and 2.0 would have been the version ostensibly approved by the community. Of course, it didn't work out that way...

 

[Weiley31]

No and that's a good thing.

 

[Burt Baccara]

My guess is they had planned to do iterative "updates" to OGL 1.0 (1.1, 1.2), and 2.0 would have been the version ostensibly approved by the community. Of course, it didn't work out that way...

All speculation and based on rumors, though I got the impression if what was called 2.0 existed, it was an aborted version that existed between 1.1 and 1.2, with "2.0" being the first try to fix 1.1 and 1.2 being a start over.

Not sure this will hold up, but this is how I visualize it:
1.0a---- (we don't like this anymore, restart button)
(start over)-----1.1-(oh crap, a leak)-----2.0----(oh crap, oh crap, another leak)----(restart button)
(start over)-----1.2
\----CC-BY