OGL v1.2 Survey Feedback: 'Hasn't Hit The Mark'

WotC has shared some of the (still ongoing) survey feedback following the release of the Open Game License v1.2 draft last week.

We want to thank the community for continuing to share their OGL 1.2 feedback with us. Already more than 10,000 of you have responded to the survey, which will close on February 3.

So far, survey responses have made it clear that this draft of OGL 1.2 hasn't hit the mark for our community. Please continue to share your thoughts.

Thanks to direct feedback from you and our virtual tabletop partners it's also clear the draft VTT policy missed the mark. Animations were clearly the wrong focus. We'll do better next round.

We will continue to keep an article updated with any new details posted here or elsewhere on the OGL. You can read it here

The linked FAQ (no, not THAT linked FAQ, the one where they say the original OGL cannot be revoked, I think we're supposed to ignore that one!) indicates that recent rumours about $30 subscriptions and homebrew content are false. They also say that they will be revising the 'harmful content' morality clause in the recent OGL draft, which in practice gives WotC power to shut down competitors at will.

You can still take the survey here until Feb 3rd.

 

[DMZ2112]

Yeah. That and all the currently circulating works upon which OGC is based on that would become unavailable as there are significant amounts of orphaned works after 23 years.

Yes. It's conceivable that Wizards could come up with some labyrinthine but fair legal agreement that lets 3PPs continue to update, modify, and iterate on their OGL 1.0a content perpetually without actually using the OGL 1.0a, but it would still require adoption, and if it is not adopted for any reason, for any given subset of products, the web of interdependency is still broken.

Still, though, the real crisis is people's loss of livelihood. The loss of so much content would be sad, but it is a secondary concern.

I'm quietly crossing my fingers for the whole SRD 3.5 under CC-BY-4.0. That would take a lot of pressure off.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

The fact that they didn't succeed isn't really relevant now is it?

I think it is... the very act of saying "Fine, we wont do that, how about this" seems to me that it shows that when push comes to shove they deal and make compromises... they DON'T do exactly what they are being accused of "Breaking contracts on a whim" cause as soon as anyone says "Hey knock it off" they stop

People are saying "There is nothing to stop them from trying again 20 years from now" etc.

we are

We are that "nothing" you alluded too.

the same thing that stopped them from killing the OGL today will stop them from "on a whim" claiming everything is canceled next time too. The ONLY work around they have is to make it so that everyone sides with them... so that means everyone agrees the company SHOULD be shut down.

We don't want them to try while also hoping they wouldn't succeed in the attempt if they do.

there is nothing that you can do, nothing Piazo can do, nothing a Judge can do, nothing any non-deity can do that will stop people from "trying"
We can stop them in there tracts if they are not petty and willing to burn everything down just to 'win'

That is the 1 and only thing I trust WotC and Hasbro to be... unwilling to burn down all there good will and sales. That's it. the end, only thing I trust ANY company with... and yes there ARE some companies I can't even trust with THAT.

Those two things are not contradictory, they are, actually, perfectly rational and complementary. That you think this is some gotcha moment is, I don't know even know what to say about that, honestly.

yeah, because remember how I just said I trust Hasbro doesn't care if they come out looking right or wrong, they wont just hold to there single minded point of view with no compromises, and remember I JUST said that I don't trust EVERY company that way? Ask yourself this... what compromises are YOU willing to make?

 

[eyeheartawk]

I'm quietly crossing my fingers for the whole SRD 3.5 under CC-BY-4.0. That would take a lot of pressure off.

It would be better.

Though, I don't see how it would fix the broken OGC problem, since if it's abandoned it doesn't really matter what license you use because they'll never be updated again.

I also don't think this is likely in a general sense. My, as well as many others, educated guess as to their motivation is to wall off their upcoming VTT from potential competition and also claw back a bunch of proper noun IP they previously granted. And, the 3.5 SRD contains alot more of them than the 5.1 SRD.

 

[mamba]

WotC put forward a new license agreement and WotC asked some people to sign it. Those people said no then leaked it over the internet, and in the space of one week the 3pp community collectively went into nuclear meltdown attacking WotC directly and vociferously. “Burn it down” they said.

clearly the license was that bad that this actually did happen…

WotC didn’t say tough luck we’re doing it anyway. They didn’t start sending out the C&D letters, or start suing. WotC just said, ok, that clearly isn’t going to work - now what about this.

yeah, because that really would have been an option. If they had it their way there would be no 1.2.

Not sure why you keep making excuses for WotC’s actions

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Still, though, the real crisis is people's loss of livelihood. The loss of so much content would be sad, but it is a secondary concern.

let me explain MY red line after reading this...

if NO COMPANY could EVER again publish ANY TTRPG at all (no D&D, no TORG, no V5, no V20, no Rifts) BUT every single person currently employed in the field (be they owner of a 3pp, or working for wotc or 3pp or contracted out ext) was guarantied to always have a steady income, I would take that deal and be a little salty at never getting professional level games again... but over all be happy.

 

[mamba]

Victory is not beating WotC. D&D continuing to do well is necessary for most of the folks we are purporting to back. Victory is 3PP coming out with at least what they previously had, if not more.

it is hard to get more than 1.0a, even matching it requires 1.0a to remain intact, therein lies the problem…

 

[eyeheartawk]

Ask yourself this... what compromises are YOU willing to make?

None.

But then, I have a irrevocable, perpetually valid license on my side. I don't have to compromise. That the whole point of the OGL. You don't negotiate with somebody robbing you. You stop it in its entirety or you get robbed. Getting robbed by degrees lesser or more is still being robbed.

I think it is... the very act of saying "Fine, we wont do that, how about this" seems to me that it shows that when push comes to shove they deal and make compromises... they DON'T do exactly what they are being accused of "Breaking contracts on a whim" cause as soon as anyone says "Hey knock it off" they stop

"I caught this guy breaking into my house three times in the past year or so, but I've caught him and he's stopped every time I caught him. Therefore, we should take no measures to ever stop him from trying again, since we'll probably just stop the next attempt."

Honestly man, in this and a bunch of other threads, you seem absolutely determined to defend WotC and make us take their crappy medicine by using whatever form of pretzel logic fits to hand.

 

[Amrûnril]

Morally? The person who wrote didn’t have to live with it.

Forever is a long time and the industry has changed dramatically and if folks were still releasing pdfs and paper books. I don’t think it ever would have come up.

Now we have multi-million dollar corporations selling computer games and copying D&D wholesale and selling it on at a mark up.

Wizards is spending hundreds of thousands of $ on R&D for future iterations of D&D while clones can benefit from that R&D at no cost to themselves.

Morally I think WotC are ok… from what I’ve seen to date. The new deal needs to stand on its own merits. If it’s fair, then morally WotC is covered in my eyes, folks should be focusing on lobbying for as good a deal as possible rather than attacking WotC.

Wizards knew that forever is a long time when they wrote the OGL. And publishers relied on forever being a long time when they chose to work under the OGL's terms. It's also only forever with regard to the content that's already been released as SRDs, not the content being produced by Wizards' current/future R&D. For that content, Wizards is welcome to write a offer a new deal that they believe stands on its own merits. But they're not entitled to take back an existing deal when publishers have accepted its constraints and relied on its promises over two decades of decision making.

Also, 1.1 was sent to specific parties under an NDA - that is not a public draft. The NDA makes it very specifically private.

No, it wasn't a public draft. It was an attempt to intimidate publishers into giving up their existing rights by threatening them with something even worse than the contracts they were being asked to sign. Which is frankly a stronger counterpoint than a public draft would have been against the argument that Wizards hasn't done anything wrong yet.

 

[TheSword]

clearly the license was that bad that this actually did happen…


yeah, because that really would have been an option. If they had it their way there would be no 1.2.

Not sure why you keep making excuses for WotC’s actions

Not sure why you keep going for the player and not the ball.

 

[Rabulias]

If WotC released the actual OGL 1.0a license itself into CC, that might be good.