Just reposting from Heath's Geekverse

[ThorinTeague]

The title is unfortunately sensationalistic and perhaps bordering on clickbaity but the content is rock solid.

It's time for Wizards to back down on "deauthorizing" 1.0a. This path is going to lead to disaster.

TRILLIONS at Risk: The Strategy to DEFEAT Hasbro and WotC in their Attack on Open Licenses, DnD, OGL

 

[ThorinTeague]

I don't say that because anyone should consider even for a second using any OGL stewarded by WoTC ever again--that shxt is some hot poison now--but because they're going to cause some real damage with these shenanigans.

 

[Morrus]

For me, yeah, even if they did back down, it's been ruined. Who says this won't happen again next year or in 5 years or 10 years? Turns out they didn't need to de-authorize it, just make it toxic.

 

[ThorinTeague]

For me, yeah, even if they did back down, it's been ruined. Who says this won't happen again next year or in 5 years or 10 years? Turns out they didn't need to de-authorize it, just make it toxic.

If the authorizing a decades established open license sets a legal precedent for open licenses outside the world of ttrpgs, then they very much need to back down, because they're going to disrupt a lot more than their own market.

 

[Horwath]

For me, yeah, even if they did back down, it's been ruined. Who says this won't happen again next year or in 5 years or 10 years? Turns out they didn't need to de-authorize it, just make it toxic.

yeah, only thing this will fix that they put new OGL with 3.0, 3.5, 4E, 5E, 5.5E(1D&D) that is stated to be irrevocable and in perpetuity without any moral clauses.

 

[dave2008]

yeah, only thing this will fix that they put new OGL with 3.0, 3.5, 4E, 5E, 5.5E(1D&D) that is stated to be irrevocable and in perpetuity without any moral clauses.

That is what they are planning to do (except the morality clause bit); however, it remains to be seen if the get there. Personally, I don't mind a morality clause that is more clearly defined by a 3rd party and with a means for review and appeal to a 3rd party.

 

[Morrus]

That is what they are planning to do (except the morality clause bit);

I thought that was the CC stuff, not the OGL v1.2? And that, like the CC 5E content, it will only be like 10% of the game, making it largely a useless gesture?

 

[Horwath]

That is what they are planning to do (except the morality clause bit); however, it remains to be seen if the get there. Personally, I don't mind a morality clause that is more clearly defined by a 3rd party and with a means for review and appeal to a 3rd party.

appealable to 3rd party?
Guess who can bribe 3rd party better? hasbro or some small publisher.
It's a lot safer without it completely.

 

[mamba]

That is what they are planning to do (except the morality clause bit); however, it remains to be seen if the get there. Personally, I don't mind a morality clause that is more clearly defined by a 3rd party and with a means for review and appeal to a 3rd party.

no they are not, 1.2 (in its current form) is more revocable than 1.0a is

 

[ThorinTeague]

yeah, only thing this will fix that they put new OGL with 3.0, 3.5, 4E, 5E, 5.5E(1D&D) that is stated to be irrevocable and in perpetuity without any moral clauses.

There is no need. It's already irrevocable.