WotC Hasbro CEO Chris Cox talks about D&D on NPRs Here & Now. Topics include Layoffs and OGL.

[Alzrius]

Really? What negative impact has it had on the hobby?

So you're of the opinion that several weeks of anxiety for the entire industry, and multiple publishers having to upend their business plans, wasn't a negative impact?

The underlying premise to what you're saying here, which is the implication that "negative impact" is only measured by permanent/continuing losses, isn't how a lot of other people define that particular phrase. But if that's what you go by, then how about this: there are other SRDs which have yet to be released into the CC, and for people who still publish under the OGL, the continuing anxiety about that is a "negative impact" by your standard.

It resulted in a far stronger open license.

No, it really didn't. Just ask anyone who publishes under the OGL for a different SRD. Or do they not count?

At the end of the day, I’d argue that this was probably the healthiest thing for the hobby since the ogl was created.

And at the end of the day, I'd say you're wrong. But don't take my word for it, take the word of this PhD dissertation about how the OGL resulted in more creativity, which means that damaging it the way WotC has is likely to result in less, since the CC doesn't have as many SRDs.

 

[Alzrius]

And as far as releasing 2024 as CC, well, ok. But continuously asking for this as a condition for trust when they haven’t actually released 2024 yet seems a bit hard for them to actually do.

Given how lagging they are with releasing the other SRDs (and no, that "we need to review them" excuse does not hold water, considering that they've been "reviewed" by the entire community for over two decades; there's no IP that they need to worry about in them), can you understand why some people are skeptical?

There’s no point in supporting the Ogl anymore.

On the contrary, I'd say there's more reason to support it now than ever.

Everyone abandoned it.

Literally, new OGL products came out today, so I don't think that you know what you're talking about, here.

Scratch that. I know that you don't.

It was proven to be without value since everyone dropped it like a dirty shirt at the first challenge.

Except for all the people who fought to save it. Sounds to me like you just don't understand its value.

At least with CC, that won’t happen again.

Keep telling yourself that. The idea of "WotC's revocation is on dubious legal ground, and would probably fail in court, but since they have enough money and lawyers to make fighting a legal battle bankrupt anyone they file suit against, it doesn't really matter," applies just as easily to CC as it does to the OGL.

Like it or not, the OGL is dead. Nothing is going to bring it back.

See above. It's still alive, and if even WotC couldn't kill it, naysayers and cynics certainly can't.

 

[Reynard]

And as far as releasing 2024 as CC, well, ok. But continuously asking for this as a condition for trust when they haven’t actually released 2024 yet seems a bit hard for them to actually do.

There’s no point in supporting the Ogl anymore. Everyone abandoned it. It was proven to be without value since everyone dropped it like a dirty shirt at the first challenge. At least with CC, that won’t happen again.

Like it or not, the OGL is dead. Nothing is going to bring it back.

You realize there are companies who built their entire business on the OGL and still have in print and supported games dependent on the OGL, right?

 

[jerryrice4949]

Well this forum brought out the usual suspects when it comes to WoTC bitterness. I don’t trust any corporations though I certainly can respect some of their employees.

While I wasn’t a fan of WoTC trying to back out of the OGL I also understand that even having something like an OGL is rare among companies and even other publishers but people act like they are owed the OGL.

 

[bedir than]

Keep telling yourself that. The idea of "WotC's revocation is on dubious legal ground, and would probably fail in court, but since they have enough money and lawyers to make fighting a legal battle bankrupt anyone they file suit against, it doesn't really matter," applies just as easily to CC as it does to the OGL.

Withdrawing from Creative Commons would be an attempt that destroys the Commons, ending software as you know it.

It is not at all similar to the wholly invented by gamers OGL

 

[Alzrius]

Withdrawing from Creative Commons would be an attempt that destroys the Commons, ending software as you know it.

Again, WotC doesn't have to be able to withdraw from it, any more than they had to be able to actually revoke the OGL. They just have to say it, making sure everyone knows they have the money and lawyers to bankrupt you in court regardless of how bogus their claims are. Then, voila: all of a sudden, people lose confidence in the CC's rendition of the 5.1 SRD.

 

[bedir than]

Again, WotC doesn't have to be able to withdraw from it, any more than they had to be able to actually revoke the OGL. They just have to say it, making sure everyone knows they have the money and lawyers to bankrupt you in court regardless of how bogus their claims are. Then, voila: all of a sudden, people lose confidence in the CC's rendition of the 5.1 SRD.

Again, doing so would put them in conflict with Microsoft, Apple and Alphabet.

 

[Alzrius]

Again, doing so would put them in conflict with Microsoft, Apple and Alphabet.

None of whom publish anything with the 5.1 SRD. They're not going to step up and be the ones to fight a court case over WotC saying "this (utterly made up) technicality lets us withdraw the 5.1 SRD from the CC, and none of the rest of the Creative Commons are affected."

 

[jerryrice4949]

Again, WotC doesn't have to be able to withdraw from it, any more than they had to be able to actually revoke the OGL. They just have to say it, making sure everyone knows they have the money and lawyers to bankrupt you in court regardless of how bogus their claims are. Then, voila: all of a sudden, people lose confidence in the CC's rendition of the 5.1 SRD.

I just find this type of logic to be a way to keep the WoTC grievances rolling. This scenario is highly unlikely but of course not impossible. It just feels exhausting to spend all this mental energy focusing on something that theoretically in the distant future could happen but probably won’t.

 

[bedir than]

None of whom publish anything with the 5.1 SRD. They're not going to step up and be the ones to fight a court case over WotC saying "this (utterly made up) technicality lets us withdraw the 5.1 SRD from the CC, and none of the rest of the Creative Commons are affected."

No.
A challenge of the legality of the CC by some kind of unilateral withdrawal does absolutely challenge any company using software licensed under the CC.
The only way to ignore that they've released under the CC is to abandon the version that was released in such a fashion.

If a company could unilaterally withdraw already exposed content Tesla would have already done so, or SpaceX, or Microsoft, or whatever your most evil tech company is.