Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
Publishing Business & Licensing
Hello, I am lawyer with a PSA: almost everyone is wrong about the OGL and SRD. Clearing up confusion.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8883988" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>I don't believe that is the wording of the draft licence (which Gizmodo says is 9,000 words, or well into double digit pages). I think its a gloss or summary, for explanation of the proposal.</p><p></p><p>I don't know what the bolded "it" refers to.</p><p></p><p>There is no doubt that OGL v 1.0a counts as an authorised version of the licence for the purposes of section 9 of itself. If WotC want to stop publishers participating in both the old and new ecosystems they will need an express "poison pill" provision similar to the one in an early iteration of the GSL.</p><p></p><p>The question I was posting about is whether OGL v 1.0a will be an authorised version for the purposes of OGL v 1.1's section 9 equivalent., and whether OGL v 1.1 will be an authorised version for the purposes of section 9 of the OGL v 1.0a. And for the reasons I gave, I very much doubt that either will be. The structure of a viral open licence means the two ecosystems need to be kept distinct if the royalty scheme is going to work. Because if they're not kept distinct, then every existing licensee will be able to use new content under v 1.0a which grants them a royalty-free licence. And this is exactly what WotC is trying to change!</p><p></p><p>The only way I can see to enable existing OGC to be licensed via new v 1.1 would be for v 1.1 to create rights in respect of OGC. But at that point it would be an authorised version of OGL v 1.0/1.0a within the meaning of their section 9, which would mean existing licensees could publish new content under the old licence.</p><p></p><p>You suggest that "using 1.1 content as source would require you to accept that 1.0a cannot be described as 'authorised'", but don't explain how that is going to work. I have said how I think it will work: there will be Licensed Content, governed by 1.1; and OGC, governed by 1.0/1.0a. And they are separate categories of content. I don't see how v 1.1 could both mingle them and keep them separate in the way you seem to be suggesting.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 8883988, member: 42582"] I don't believe that is the wording of the draft licence (which Gizmodo says is 9,000 words, or well into double digit pages). I think its a gloss or summary, for explanation of the proposal. I don't know what the bolded "it" refers to. There is no doubt that OGL v 1.0a counts as an authorised version of the licence for the purposes of section 9 of itself. If WotC want to stop publishers participating in both the old and new ecosystems they will need an express "poison pill" provision similar to the one in an early iteration of the GSL. The question I was posting about is whether OGL v 1.0a will be an authorised version for the purposes of OGL v 1.1's section 9 equivalent., and whether OGL v 1.1 will be an authorised version for the purposes of section 9 of the OGL v 1.0a. And for the reasons I gave, I very much doubt that either will be. The structure of a viral open licence means the two ecosystems need to be kept distinct if the royalty scheme is going to work. Because if they're not kept distinct, then every existing licensee will be able to use new content under v 1.0a which grants them a royalty-free licence. And this is exactly what WotC is trying to change! The only way I can see to enable existing OGC to be licensed via new v 1.1 would be for v 1.1 to create rights in respect of OGC. But at that point it would be an authorised version of OGL v 1.0/1.0a within the meaning of their section 9, which would mean existing licensees could publish new content under the old licence. You suggest that "using 1.1 content as source would require you to accept that 1.0a cannot be described as 'authorised'", but don't explain how that is going to work. I have said how I think it will work: there will be Licensed Content, governed by 1.1; and OGC, governed by 1.0/1.0a. And they are separate categories of content. I don't see how v 1.1 could both mingle them and keep them separate in the way you seem to be suggesting. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
Publishing Business & Licensing
Hello, I am lawyer with a PSA: almost everyone is wrong about the OGL and SRD. Clearing up confusion.
Top