Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ThorinTeague" data-source="post: 8898461" data-attributes="member: 7032074">I'm not a lawyer in my opinion is not expert. That said....I have heard convincing and seemingly well reasoned arguments from numerous different internet lawyers about the legality of ogl1.1, specifically voiding 1.0 and earlier. Some seem to think that wotc has this power and/or right. Others do not. Now I wouldn't know How to compare and contrast the merits of these arguments one way or another. I lack the expertise and education to add a whole lot of insight or meaning to what has already been said. I would encourage you to duly and diligently research and consider different perspectives And take into consideration all sides of the story.But this? This was a payoff. That podcast (at least that episode) is a blatant payoff and its commentators are obviously WoTC sock puppets... At least for this ep. Did you just glaze over the way they introduced themselves in the first few moments? I mean the way they describe THEIR OWN merits and creds...I mean, this guy gives an analysis from a supposedly expert point of view, and asserts multiple times what the intentions of the original writers of the OGL were. I've never heard of a lawyer claiming to know the intentions of authors of legal docs who aren't present.His credentials coupled with that tears this horseshit down pretty thoroughly, and I don't even need any of it to tear it down from the front end instead.Some real doozies in here, but one gem in particular: he says confidently that he absolutely knows that those who wrote The Open gaming license version 1.0 did not intend it to subsidize competition. He literally has no idea that paizo is run by people who wrote that document.He goes on, this man literally said with 100% confidence that he absolutely knows that the writers of the original OGL did not intend it to be permanent, and did not really mean "open' when they said open.Like, how could you naughty word up your job THAT bad? Really, how could you be this bad at your job? Does the 0675 episode number imply that there were 674 episodes before this? 674 hours of these tools trying to provide legal commentary?He just doesn't know the history. He was talking about events in 1999 and 2000 as if it were 2023 back then. Dungeons & dragons was well on its way to becoming and obscure relic. It was very close to death.I'm just in awe of the blatantly obvious... Its either incompetence or its lying. Take your pick. I didn't list to anything else from oa.</blockquote>

Verification