Hello, I am lawyer with a PSA: almost everyone is wrong about the OGL and SRD. Clearing up confusion.

[GMforPowergamers]

How is buying from the second hand market supporting WotC?

by buying up part of the limited (and as you said high priced) books you drive up the demand, and as such the price. As you drive up the price you make it more likely for someone to buy the PDF and or POD from wotc.

Lets say I make self sealing stem bolts. Out in the wild there are 200 self sealing stem bolts, you can buy one of those on 2ndary market or form me. It makes common sense that buying 1 or more of that 200 is not supporting or helping me, BUT what you just did was drive down the number of self sealing stem bolts.

With a game like D&D it gets worse. If tomorrow I go to my crawl space and grab my 2e books, I am not buying anything. HOWEVER if I walk into a con or gaming store and start a 2e game I am introducing new players and they if they like my game may then go buy from WotC books.

The only way to not support the IP holder of D&D is to leave D&D behinde. Now I don't advocate leaving. IF I was going to I would have in 2014.

 

[Reynard]

by buying up part of the limited (and as you said high priced) books you drive up the demand, and as such the price. As you drive up the price you make it more likely for someone to buy the PDF and or POD from wotc.

People should not feel compelled to take responsibility for what others do.

 

[Steel_Wind]

First, the OGL is likely not irrevocable. I've seen many people saying that, for some reason, Wizards of the Coast cannot revoke earlier versions of their license; that the license, once put out, can never be taken away, and that people and companies can keep making content for 5e forever.

This is false.

I have been practicing law for 28 years now. I don't agree with this statement. At all. I think it is wrong in law.

Now, that does not mean that WotC could not get MANY parties to agree to the terms of a new contract, which includes provisions which, through express agreement, has the explicit effect of bringing those specific parties' rights under previous version of the OGL and SRD to an end. In fact, that approach was previously floated by WotC ca. 2008. It never really went anywhere; and new corporations would not be bound by such an explicit waiver of rights under the provisions of prior OGLs.

But that's not something which can unilaterally be forced on anyone by WotC.

Anyways, while there is a lot of non-lawyer "sky is falling" discussion about this, that does not mean that each and every post, even if written by a lawyer, is necessarily correct.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

People should not feel compelled to take responsibility for what others do.

that is perfectly fine. I just want to make sure it is an informed decision, because I have worked with companies that buy up there own secondary market but not all of it, so they can raise scarcity and as such raise the price and make the price of working for them look better.

 

[DavyGreenwind]

This is the bit that confuses me (as a non-lawyer).

The core part of the OGL is this:
4. Grant and Consideration: In consideration for agreeing to use this License, the Contributors grant You a perpetual, worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive license with the exact terms of this License to Use, the Open Game Content.

"Use" is defined in the OGL as "to use, Distribute, copy, edit, format, modify, translate and otherwise create Derivative Material of Open Game Content."

"Distribute" is further defined to mean "to reproduce, license, rent, lease, sell, broadcast, publicly display, transmit or otherwise distribute"

So, when Paizo released Pathfinder, they used the OGL, and were thus granted a perpetual license to license Open Game Content. So given the license's viral nature, I should be able to rely on e.g. Paizo's offer of the license instead of Wizards'. And there are a few places that have copies of the SRD published without any changes.

And this license is printed in quite a few books, as required by the license itself. That printed license promises me that I can use the Open Game Content in that book under the terms of the license. Again as a non-lawyer, this does not seem like a thing Wizards should be able to revoke.

This is a common misconception: "perpetual" does not mean "irrevocable." "Perpetual" means it has no expiration date (as opposed to a license that is only good for five years, for instance), but even a perpetual license can be revoked.

And though WotC gave Paizo permission to sublicense the SRD, that permission could be revoked too, if the rest of the agreement is revoked. No one gets to claim the SRD as their own licensable property just by printing it.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Anyways, while there is a lot of non-lawyer "sky is falling" discussion about this, that does not mean that each and every post, even if written by a lawyer, is necessarily correct.

it's that physics cat...

the OGL is both revoked and not revoked until a judge rules (aka open the box)

 

[Dausuul]

by buying up part of the limited (and as you said high priced) books you drive up the demand, and as such the price. As you drive up the price you make it more likely for someone to buy the PDF and or POD from wotc.

Strictly speaking, this is true, but it's a miniscule sliver compared to buying directly from Wizards.

What's really important is publicizing what you're doing. If you just quit buying WotC material, it will get lost in the market noise and it won't push them to change their ways. Quit buying and raise a stink -- in concert with many other people doing the same -- and there's a decent chance to get their attention.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Strictly speaking, this is true, but it's a miniscule sliver compared to buying directly from Wizards.

yup. it is small support but it is support. now if (since I have not priced 2e books in 20 years) the poster had not said they were already expensive I would not even have thought of my experience.

What's really important is publicizing what you're doing. If you just quit buying WotC material, it will get lost in the market noise and it won't push them to change their ways. Quit buying and raise a stink -- in concert with many other people doing the same -- and there's a decent chance to get their attention.

again quiting WotC is great, but moving away from any IP they own is better. Again I just want everyone clear on this. The IP of D&D is what WotC seems (IMO) to care about. So playing and buying and talking D&D is helping that IP

 

[S'mon]

This US contract lawyer is currently agreeing with everything I've said


One thing he just pointed out is that the OGL says sub-licences shall survive termination of the original licence. He also agrees that 1.0 doesn't look to be revocable, and was clearly 'authorised'.

 

[jgbrowning]

This US contract lawyer is currently agreeing with everything I've said


One thing he just pointed out is that the OGL says sub-licences shall survive termination of the original licence. He also agrees that 1.0 doesn't look to be revocable, and was clearly 'authorised'.

I've published material that is 100% OGC content under this license that is not derivative of WotC's SRD, if they revoke the license, is all the material I released now suddenly not open material? Or is that the kind of stuff that is part of "all sublicenses shall survive the termination of this License."