1.1/Terms Signature Leak, it was a draft?

[Stalker0]

This is just not true. I have had this happen and so have other people on these forums. My company regularly sends out contract drafts and there is nothing to identify the contract as draft necessarily (it depends on who sends it as all PMs can write contracts in my firm). Even a standard AIA (American Institute of Architects) contract is often sent as a draft to modified as needed by the client. We then revise the contract or add to as needed. All of these contracts come with signature lines.

I don't know if I can legally share these documents, but I have easy access to them (and have written them myself). I think I will see if I can redact one and post it.

This may be where previous experiences cloud people's notions of what is possible. I can say that I worked many years for big 4 accounting firms and computer forensics companies, and the idea of sending a document that "could" be a draft or might not be is just ludicrous. Frankly any time I have drafted any document at my company (not even legal documents or ones going out to clients) I have to put big draft notes on it.

So the idea that someone could just send someone a contract with a line to sign, and go "oh no that's totally a draft" its just such a foreign idea to me. But could I believe that is how some industry spaces work....I could. Is that "normal" in the RP industry, I guess that's a question for RP corporate people.

 

[dave2008]

This may be where previous experiences cloud people's notions of what is possible. I can say that I worked many years for big 4 accounting firms and computer forensics companies, and the idea of sending a document that "could" be a draft or might not be is just ludicrous. Frankly any time I have drafted any document at my company (not even legal documents or ones going out to clients) I have to put big draft notes on it.

So the idea that someone could just send someone a contract with a line to sign, and go "oh no that's totally a draft" its just such a foreign idea to me. But could I believe that is how some industry spaces work....I could. Is that "normal" in the RP industry, I guess that's a question for RP corporate people.

It happens. I can only speak for my own experience and another poster (who claimed to handle 350 million in sales contracts) who agreed with me. The important thing is, you typical send a draft you are happy with, one that you would be OK with it being signed. It is executable as is, that is why it not called a "Draft" or it doesn't have watermarks. The idea is it can be signed if the other party agrees. However, it is still a draft that can be revised too.

So what WotC provided was a draft, but if it didn't say so, then they were fine with it being executed as is. I will note that the only first hand account we have admitted that there was language that said that the document was negotiable. Perhaps if we knew what that language was we could get a better understanding of the intent.

 

[Iosue]

See it’s getting all confused again. The “contracts” that WotC sent to be signed were specifically designated “term sheets.” That is explicitly a draft, in that even both parties are immediately happy and sign it, it only functions as a letter of intent while the legal teams hammer out the real contracts.

But what people are complaining about being called a draft is the copy of OGL 1.1 apparently sent along with the term sheets. That could only be considered as a reference document, since signing the term sheet would not mean signing the OGL. The term sheets were for licenses separate from the OGL. It was perforce a draft, inasmuch as it was never made public.

The only question, then, is whether the OGL 1.1 was represented to the 3PPs as a draft, or subject to change, or open to feedback, anything to indicate it was not a final version that WotC was committed to moving forward with. WotC’s statements suggest that they were seeking feedback, but we don’t know what kind of explanation that WotC gave. But, even Kyle Brink seems to think there was a break in communication that encouraged someone to leak the draft.

 

[mamba]

But, even Kyle Brink seems to think there was a break in communication that encouraged someone to leak the draft.

or that someone correctly realized that leaking it would result in a lot more allies trying to get this improved…

 

[Parmandur]

or that someone correctly realized that leaking it would result in a lot more allies trying to get this improved…

Heck, there is reason to believe that people within WotC were on Team "Leak This To Cause a Stir and Stop It."

Whatever WotC intent when theybsent out 1.1 to third parties, it does seem quite plausible to me that they had already received sufficient feedback to have gone back to inter al bickering and negotiation over a revision prior to the leaks raising a storm.