How long do we wait for WoTC to speak?

[R_J_K75]

How long should the community wait on WoTC to speak?

I havent been following this too closely other than browsing some threads here on EN World. I just have a few questions, and simple yes or no answers or a few short sentences based in fact is all I'm after, not speculation.

1) Has WotC acknowledged the leaked revised OGL as theirs? As far as I know at this point it's just a draft, correct?
2) Has WotC made any official statements on the matter or given a time frame of when they'll address the situation?

 

[Ondath]

I havent been following this too closely other than browsing some threads here on EN World. I just have a few questions, and simple yes or no answers or a few short sentences based in fact is all I'm after, not speculation.

1) Has WotC acknowledged the leaked revised OGL as theirs? As far as I know at this point it's just a draft, correct?
2) Has WotC made any official statements on the matter or given a time frame of when they'll address the situation?

1) WotC didn't acknowledge anything, but the leaks are in line with the official announcement they made back in December, and several industry people practically confirmed the leaks (most notably, Kickstarter's head of games division confirmed that they negotiated a lower royalty rate, which was one of the new pieces of information that came from the leaks).
2) They didn't give a specific time frame, but it's now 3 days since they said they'll share more soon (TM), and all their competitors already made some fairly big announcements. Each moment that they're stalling is working against them.

 

[R_J_K75]

1) WotC didn't acknowledge anything, but the leaks are in line with the official announcement they made back in December, and several industry people practically confirmed the leaks (most notably, Kickstarter's head of games division confirmed that they negotiated a lower royalty rate, which was one of the new pieces of information that came from the leaks).
2) They didn't give a specific time frame, but it's now 3 days since they said they'll share more soon (TM), and all their competitors already made some fairly big announcements. Each moment that they're stalling is working against them.

Thanks, that's all I wanted to know. I haven't read the old or new OGL and wouldn't understand them or the changes if I did. I've never had need to use it. I'm interpreting your response as that there's some truth to the leaked revised OGL draft. Seems there's also been some backroom discussions behind the scenes between WotC, KS and possibly other companies of importance in the industry but nothing is set in stone yet. I agree the longer WotC waits to address this the worse it'll be, and their credibility will be gone, but I'll reserve my judgement until something is officially announced/released.

 

[Nikosandros]

I havent been following this too closely other than browsing some threads here on EN World. I just have a few questions, and simple yes or no answers or a few short sentences based in fact is all I'm after, not speculation.

1) Has WotC acknowledged the leaked revised OGL as theirs? As far as I know at this point it's just a draft, correct?
2) Has WotC made any official statements on the matter or given a time frame of when they'll address the situation?

No to both questions.

 

[S'mon]

I think this specific question is best detached from the more general threads.

I have a friend with a team of writers working on a big 3PP Kickstarter/publication, planned to be for 5e using the OGL. She and the team, with my advice, are now working on a non-OGL version. But I suggested that before doing too much work on this - it will be a lot of work - she wait to see if WoTC makes an announcement reassuring 3PPs that they are not trying to revoke OGL 1.0. I suggested waiting until Monday 16th before pressing forward. But I wanted to see what other people think. How long should the community wait on WoTC to speak? Or should we not be waiting? A lot of people already seem set on abandoning the OGL, just from the threat that's been raised.

I just wanted to confirm that as of yesterday, my friend is pressing on with her team removing all copyrightable SRD material from her Kickstarter project and planning to release it non-OGL. I think the combination of silence from WoTC, yesterday's leak, and the community mood makes this the clear best approach.

 

[Nikosandros]

I just wanted to confirm that as of yesterday, my friend is pressing on with her team removing all copyrightable SRD material from her Kickstarter project and planning to release it non-OGL. I think the combination of silence from WoTC, yesterday's leak, and the community mood makes this the clear best approach.

Unfortunately, this seems the wisest course of action.

 

[S'mon]

I see The Guardian newspaper is on it now ‘People are leaving the game’: Dungeons & Dragons fans revolt against new restrictions

 

[S'mon]

According to this leak/rumour Thread by @andreas_mwg on Thread Reader App WoTC are now planning to say on January 16th that existing published OGL 1.0 material is ok (can stay up), but that anything new has to use the new evil OGL 2.0 - and that OGL 2.0 will remain a trap, so this looks like confirmation that new products will need to be de-OGL'd.

 

[R_J_K75]

I see The Guardian newspaper is on it now

Thread by @andreas_mwg on Thread Reader App

Content aside, the grammar, spelling, formatting of both these articles are on par with what a third grader would turn in. I've noticed this more and more that internet articles are becoming worse and worse almost as if text/twitter speak is becoming the new norm over proper English. Wednesday night I read an article titled, "Red Stewart remembers Jeff Beck". It's almost like people as I wouldn't even call them reporters or journalists anymore, are writing articles on topics they have no clue about. Kind of makes you wonder who actually came up with and wrote the new OGL?

 

[ilgatto]

Well, define "support."

As a preliminary matter, we don't know who wrote the FAQ. We don't know who at Hasbro (if anyone at Hasbro) authorized the FAQ. The FAQ is what is considered extrinsic to the OGL and is post hoc (after the faq heh ... fact,/event).

You ask why they would "support" the OGL if they never wanted it? Well, look at the timeline!

In 2000, the OGL was published.
Until the latter part of 2001, WoTC was independent (autonomous). Then they were folded into Hasbro. It usually takes time for the higher-ups to start paying attention.
In 2003, they did the first distancing from the OGL (and 3e) be releasing 3.5e.
By 2007 they had already announced the development of (non-OGL) 4e. Remeber that 4e is when Hasbro put a bunch of resources into D&D.

In other words, after a relatively stable edition from 1974-1999 (OD&D-2e were largely compatible), they released a half edition within three years, and a fill new edition within seven just to try and get away from the OGL.

Hasbro has never supported the OGL. People within the subsidiary, WoTC, have.

That's why I say that things are a happy accident. Once it was out in the wild, it was hard to contain. I would guess that we have gotten to the point that Hasbro thinks it is worth the PR and legal fees to try and put the genie back in the bottle. Who knows?

You may be right but isn't this timeline a bit of a hindsight maneuver based on a specific premise? I remember thinking when I first read the 4E rules back in the day that it was Wizbro's attempt to attract folk riding the World-of-Warcraft bandwagon, which I was told had millions of paying customers at the time.

Interestingly, from what I understand of it, Wizbros's leaked GL specifically mentions such notions as people not being allowed to create anything non-written or pdf-able on numerous occasions, which made me think that - if anything - they may well be trying to monopolize D&D's presence on the www as well as in the (computer/tablet/phone/watches/glasses/lamps/what-have-you-these-days) gaming industry.

Wouldn't you also agree that it would be in Wizbro's interests to cash in on 3PP www and gaming because, as a big company, they may be more limited in what they can do then 3PP's? Also, being a big, slow-moving company, people signing the supposed new GL would allow them to benefit from creative, innovative, trend-setting minds all over the www without actually having to pay them.

So perhaps Wizbro have just always been trying to catch up to the ever-growing www-ification of D&D and are now even more eager to succeed because DDB and 1D&D?