Search results

This is starting to stray into tin-foil hat stuff now. I'm sorry, WotC just isn't going to do that in terms of writing material for their game. What they are likely to do though is allow others to implement that within a VTT they operate and own and share that material (like, say, via the...

No, I haven't thought about publishing a setting book. And to be more focused on the point, WotC hasn't thought about publishing your setting book, either. And it's not going to do so now - or in the future. So what are you really going on about now, in practical terms? I appreciate that your...

It is not the fact of this statement that struck me as odd -- it was the indignation behind it. Stepping back, how is this an unjust result? Somebody else could do any of this under the 1.0a OGL anyways (other than protected content). Why is it unjust or seen as wrong for WotC to do this? I...

Let me be very clear about this in a plain and unambiguous manner: Can WotC enter into an agreement with a party, wherein the terms of that new agreement, rights that could otherwise be exercised under another prior contract, even if expressed to last until the end of time itself, be declared...

The point emphasized above is true, but only technically true. The devil is in the details of the meaning of "you". The problem is that "you" is a corporation, and so "you" is a paper creation involving a minute book and some corporate documents. It doesn't ordinarily mean the people, skills...

This contractual approach misses the real teeth that the OGL 1.0a has always had, and that's if that if somebody uses the 1.0a licence to create something, others can then use THAT licensed OGL work as the premise for its further sublicensed derived work. And because you can't take that valid...

I don't think that it will end up as promissory estoppel, though I appreciate that you can put that lipstick on it and it seems to look bright and red and fits the outline. The problem is, estoppel is weak on the remedy side and uncertain (if not poor) in the context of ongoing commerce. The...

"They" haven't "said" anything. Yet. Still, the leaks of internal documents from within WotC (at least one of their employees was not happy with what he/she/they were reading and leaked it to the media) suggests there is some unpleasant maneuvering ahead with the OGL 1.1. Draft document(s)...

While it is likely that such a trial would be held in the USA and apply American state law, the FAQ would also be admitted under any pleading of unconscionability in Canada under the principle set out by the SCC in Uber Technologies v. Heller. In that case, Uber relied upon a commercial...

On a practical basis, if this goes to court - there are going to be arguments tendered about the ambiguity of the 1 and 1.0a OGL. WotC will say it means "A" and it isn't ambiguous, and the other party(ies) will say it plainly is ambiguous, it means "B" and will offer a MASSIVE weight of evidence...

Correct. Moreover, it is more nuanced than that. It isn't simply whether the OGL can be revoked in a prospective manner so that it doesn't apply to a 6e, say (spoilers: they can get rid of that, in part at least), it is whether it is possible to revoke derivative rights which accrued in the...

That might be taking Henry VI, Part 2, a wee too far :) Shakespeare intended it as a joke the audience would laugh out loud at, not civil rights/ political advice!

There's no court backlog in Iran, North Korea -- or the PRC. Funny about that. In 1591, Shakespeare didn't think lawyers were something which stood between the State and his fundamental rights (that's because in 1591, he lived in a dictatorship where he and most other Englishmen didn't really...

Arguably yes, but really, the answer is No. Products sold on DMs Guild (and Pathfinder Infinite) may include some OGL content, but their chief distinguishing feature is that they include protected content that is exempt from the OGL. Many (most?) products sole on DMs Guild don't include the OGL...

But it is different. Youtube provides essentially no compensation to the random person who posted it. In your example, the author of material under the OGL has a property interest in it, and unlike a poster on YouTube -- they have a prima facie legal right to sell it. Drive Thru is in a...

Most gamers are very good at complicated rules. Some of us decided to turn that into a career. It's not like we lawyers have a huge presence among gamers, it's more a case that after nearly 50 years, there are just a lot of gamers. It's a big hobby and so you get people from all walks of...

Translation: you suggest WotC persuade and/or bully Drive-Thru RPG to take down a large swath of OGL content. Seeing as being the font of commercially available OGL content it its very reason for existence and most of its entire business model, I'm not sure that Drive-Thru would willingly do...

The Rules of Court or other Rules of Civil Procedure in most common law jurisdictions recognize that when the interpretation of a contract in issue would impact the rights of another party, that affected non-party has a substantive right to intervene in the action in which it has not been named...

The larger issue here is not whether WotC can revoke the OGL going forward, it is what the impact of previous uses of the OGL -- and then use of that material by sub-licensees means and whether that can be stopped. If it can be stopped, can that be stopped via injunction? I think, that result...

The practice of law is not an academic discussion. Corporate/commercial litigation (which is what I do) is not a theoretical exercise. There is no point in trying to write a factum before the fact. I won't even get into a discussion about the minefield and inapplicability of any principles of...