Hmmm...this is fun to consider. Are they heroes for:
A) releasing open content to begin with, which very few companies do with their IP?
B) releasing open content because they thought it would directly benefit themselves?
C) attempting to rescind their open licence in order to benefit themselves/their investors?
D) ultimately doing the right thing, and permanently sharing a large amount of their IP?
Ethically speaking, this is kind of an interesting question. A deontologist (classic example Immanuel Kant) would probably argue that they are not heroes, since ultimately ethics are tied to motives (though I suppose if you are a hardcore capitalist an argument could be made that maximizing return to investors is a categorical imperative, and so the motives were not immoral to begin with).
But a consequentialist (classic example John Stuart Mill) would definitely argue that they are heroes, because motives are irrelevant, all that matters are results. I think both a rules or an act-based consequentialist would agree that this is a outcome that increases the common good, so ultimately Hasbro/WotC deserve plaudits and we should now erect a corporate statue in the town square.
I now return you to your regularly scheduled episode of The Good Place.
