How long do we wait for WoTC to speak?

[BrokenTwin]

To me this feels like saying "Well everyone is moving away from the coasts because of global warming so now is a great time to buy beach real estate."

 

[delericho]

I agree but if the OGL is left intact, even just for now, it may provide a rich market since so many publishers are leaving it.

If OGL 1.0 is left intact, and you are prepared to abandon anything and everything you create (potentially at short notice), then you might well be right. There is likely to be a gap in the market for D&D-supporting materials, and someone could indeed fill that.

But if you're planning to build a world, or any similar IP that you expect to have ongoing value, I'd recommend avoiding the OGL. And I'd advise against signing up to the OGL 1.1 (as leaked) under any circumstances - that "we can change it at any time" should be an absolute deal-breaker.

All IMO, of course. (And I'm not a lawyer, if that should matter.)

 

[S'mon]

If it's a large project with a lot of time and money involved they should wait for whatever Wizards says.
Especially if it's a first time go at this. When Critical Role does non-D&D viewership shrinks. When an indie with an established name does D&D stuff their numbers explode (see Level up v WOIN).
D&D is still the largest market, by far.
Waiting for a chance that Wizards backtracks means waiting for a chance to grab onto what remains of that market, which will still be the largest even if it shrinks, especially since 3pp are fracturing rather than unifying.
Your friends are risking money. The safest thing to do is wait. The emotional thing to do is rush. They don't have to copy the big players because there's no need for vengeance.

Well I think if it's published it will still say "5e" on the cover, even if it's modified to remove any copyrightable SRD material.

 

[S'mon]

What's this about WoTC releasing a response today?

 

[Reynard]

What's this about WoTC releasing a response today?

Apparently the WotC response goes live at 3PM (according to a tweet posted in another thread).

 

[bedir than]

Well I think if it's published it will still say "5e" on the cover, even if it's modified to remove any copyrightable SRD material.

Scrubbing out all Wizards IP and publishing as if nothing changed still probably means the most money

 

[Grendel_Khan]

Apparently the WotC response goes live at 3PM (according to a tweet posted in another thread).

That tweet was from Cawood Publishing, who, when asked if it was confirmed, basically said the news was from Roll for Combat. Bit of a source loop right now.

 

[Langy]

Unpopular opinion- OA (as you described) is right. Well, not the part were they are attacking a journalist. But in describing how a corporation works.

I went over this in my own thread (describing the 3e/4e transition), but Hasbro never wanted the OGL. It is completely a (happy) accident of history. Championed by Dancey and WoTC and released before Hasbro folded WoTC in completely.

So what happened next? First, Hasbro releases 3.5e! In order to differentiate their product from the OGL.
Next ... 4e. And 4e doesn't use the OGL, but used a non-open license.
When 5e was released, it was under the radar and with a small team. But even then, it is any understanding that Hasbro's lawyers fought to keep the OGL restricted to the prior version- not to expand it to make it more "5e friendly."

If you think of any major corporation and any major brand, you don't see open licensing. D&D is the exception. And now that it's making major money, they likely want that exception to end.

(Again, not a defense of Hasbro screwing over 3PP at all. Just that this was unfortunately foreseeable.)

There are a number of major software corporations that do open licensing and release open source software.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

There are a number of major software corporations that do open licensing and release open source software.

Really? There's open licenses and open source software???!!!???

I am shocked. Truly, truly shocked. I mean ... what a wonderful idea! I wonder if they borrowed the whole concept from Ryan Dancey?

 

[Umbran]

Either they're exhibiting a whole lot of incompetence or something else is up.

I think they expect that a content-less response won't reduce push-back, and may actually make people more mad.

That means they need a response with some content. That probably means several go-rounds as they consider options, with lots of communication between business, marketing, and legal departments. Fast-drafting various new license options, etc.

This whole things is a big change management failure, that's for sure.