The thinking seems to be that Microsoft and Apple both rely on CC code and therefore would be compelled to defend against people being able to pull their code from CC and then force MS or A to license the code or replace it.
Unlike the OGL, Creative Commons is backed by a far larger team of legal minds operating around the world. Moreover, the version of CC-BY (4.0) that the D&D 5e SRD was licensed was created after the issues with revocability were brought up. Whereas the OGL remains frozen in the legal world of the early 2000s. Next, the OGL as a license is not well respected among the open content community. However, any threat to Creative Commons has thousands of interested parties, not just big corporations.
And how would those parties get involved if WotC - after issuing some BS about the 5.1 SRD no longer being allowable to use under Creative Commons - filed suit against a particular company who published something anyway? How would they take part in a case where they were not named parties?
It appears to be settled law that CC is perpetual and irrevocable. WotC just can't do what you are concerned about.
Again, that doesn't prevent WotC from either issuing a threat of a lawsuit, or of taking someone to court. "Settled law" doesn't mean "you can't sue someone for this reason." At best, it means quick dismissal via summary judgment, but that's a significant roll of the dice (no pun intended) if that's what you're counting on.
"Perpetual" is already in the OGL. See it right there, in Section 4? WotC just used a different term in their dubious justification for trying to yank it, which is something they can do for any other license.
Again, I don't disagree. I just remember that we all said that before, and that people seem to be fetishizing how "safe" the Creative Commons is compared to the OGL.
I don't know what to tell you. Bigger companies than WotC/Hasbro have released stuff under CC. It is a vanishingly small probability that they would try and revoke it for the 5.1 SRD.
Likely will provide lawyers who are experts in defending open content licenses to represent the publisher who is being sued by Wizards.
It will follow the same pattern as other lawsuits involving open source or open content.
technically they can just keep on publishing and then the ball is in WotCs court.
the difference is that with the OGL no one else has a reason to jump in… the actual case was still very much an uphill battle for WotC to win (I don’t think they would have had a chance)
saying you will revoke the OGL is a legal threat in itself
