Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
Publishing Business & Licensing
My thoughts on the new OGL v1.2 draft
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8910539" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>Where is section 9 of the existing OGL mentioned in the draft 1.2 document?</p><p></p><p>Here is the whole text of the notice of "deauthorisation":</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px">The Open Game License 1.0a is no longer an authorized license. This means that you may not use that version of the OGL, or any prior version, to publish SRD content after (effective date). It does not mean that any content previously published under that version needs to update to this license. Any previously published content remains licensed under whichever version of the OGL was in effect when you published that content. </p><p></p><p>What is the legal effect of this? And what is the legal basis on which it purports to operate? I don't think it's clear.</p><p></p><p>For instance, it says that "Any previously published content remains licensed under whichever version of the OGL was in effect when you published that content." What is meant, in that sentence, by the verb "licensed"? What permissions are part of that licence?</p><p></p><p>To me, the most obvious way of understanding that notice is that it is a withdrawal of the offer to license the SRD on the terms set out in the OGL v 1.0a. This means, in terms of section 2 of the OGL v 1.0a, that the SRD is <em>not</em> "Open Game Content that contains a notice indicating that the Open Game Content may only be Used under and in terms of this License." What effect does that have on existing grants of permission under section 4? I've conjectured some possibilities in the PSA thread, and you've read my posts. One possible construction is that it means the SRD is no longer the subject matter of the section 4 grant, as that grant is (on the conjectured construction) confined to OGC to which currently contains a section 2 notice.</p><p></p><p>I don't know if the preceding is the argument that WotC is relying on. They may have several in mind. It's the best argument that I know that gives WotC the result it wants - it confines the previous permission granted very narrowly, allowing existing works to continue to be sold but brining all future licensing of SRD OGC (including by way of sub-licences) to an end.</p><p></p><p>If this is your interpretation of section 9, I don't agree with it. I can't see any plausible construction of section 9 on which it contains a power of revocation.</p><p></p><p>And? This has been discussed to death in many threads including the lawyer-PSA thread. I don't see how it bears on the point I was making, which is that WotC in its FAQ never said that the offer to license would not be withdrawn.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 8910539, member: 42582"] Where is section 9 of the existing OGL mentioned in the draft 1.2 document? Here is the whole text of the notice of "deauthorisation": [indent]The Open Game License 1.0a is no longer an authorized license. This means that you may not use that version of the OGL, or any prior version, to publish SRD content after (effective date). It does not mean that any content previously published under that version needs to update to this license. Any previously published content remains licensed under whichever version of the OGL was in effect when you published that content. [/indent] What is the legal effect of this? And what is the legal basis on which it purports to operate? I don't think it's clear. For instance, it says that "Any previously published content remains licensed under whichever version of the OGL was in effect when you published that content." What is meant, in that sentence, by the verb "licensed"? What permissions are part of that licence? To me, the most obvious way of understanding that notice is that it is a withdrawal of the offer to license the SRD on the terms set out in the OGL v 1.0a. This means, in terms of section 2 of the OGL v 1.0a, that the SRD is [i]not[/i] "Open Game Content that contains a notice indicating that the Open Game Content may only be Used under and in terms of this License." What effect does that have on existing grants of permission under section 4? I've conjectured some possibilities in the PSA thread, and you've read my posts. One possible construction is that it means the SRD is no longer the subject matter of the section 4 grant, as that grant is (on the conjectured construction) confined to OGC to which currently contains a section 2 notice. I don't know if the preceding is the argument that WotC is relying on. They may have several in mind. It's the best argument that I know that gives WotC the result it wants - it confines the previous permission granted very narrowly, allowing existing works to continue to be sold but brining all future licensing of SRD OGC (including by way of sub-licences) to an end. If this is your interpretation of section 9, I don't agree with it. I can't see any plausible construction of section 9 on which it contains a power of revocation. And? This has been discussed to death in many threads including the lawyer-PSA thread. I don't see how it bears on the point I was making, which is that WotC in its FAQ never said that the offer to license would not be withdrawn. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
Publishing Business & Licensing
My thoughts on the new OGL v1.2 draft
Top