Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Staffan" data-source="post: 9434172" data-attributes="member: 907">The OGL has this clause in it:9. Updating the License: Wizards or its designated Agents may publish updated versions of this License. You may use any authorized version of this License to copy, modify and distribute any Open Game Content originally distributed under any version of this License.To me, that reads that should they create an OGL 1.2 with the word "irrevocable" added to clause 4, future users could use the irrevocable version of the license to copy, modify, and distribute any OGC originally distributed under 1.0 (a). But I'm not a lawyer.The major difference between the GSL and this is that the GSL was fair. Well, the license itself was bad, but it was handled in a pretty fair way. The d20STL (the license allowing you to use the d20 logo to indicate compatibility with D&D) was never promised to be permanent, and had its terms changed multiple times as the need arose, and even included provisions for what'd happen if it was canceled. They didn't touch the actual OGL or SRD, that remained sacrosanct – they probably never expected that anyone would manage to produce a viable alternative based on the SRD (likely the expectations was that someone might make a game about as successful as Arcana Unearthed or Mutants & Masterminds – fine for a smaller company, but wholly beneath WOTC's notice), but Paizo sure did.And from what I recall at the time, the overall reaction was more "Well, that sucks" than the "How DARE they" the latest attempt provoked.</blockquote>

Verification