Paizo Posts New Draft of ORC License

A second draft of the Open RPG Creative (ORC) license has been posted by Paizo, incorporating changes based on feedback on the first draft.

This second draft incorporates changes and suggestions from hundreds of participating publishers on the ORC License Discord community, adds significant clarity to key terms and definitions, substantially increases the size and scope of the project’s official FAQ, and introduces several basic quality-of-life improvements across the board.

You can download a copy of the ORC license and its associated FAQ/AxE (Answers and Explanations) document below. Our intention is to solicit “final” feedback on the ORC License Discord until the end of the day NEXT Monday, May 22nd. We intend for this wave of commentary to be the last round before presenting the truly final version of the license, which we plan to release by the end of May.

Our deepest thanks to all project participants. Your feedback has been invaluable in making the ORC License an ideal open gaming license that will serve the community long into the future.

A new era of open gaming is nearly here!

 

[kunadam]

Eventually, it became clear that not only was this not a design choice for the license, but there was no room for voices that did not absolutely agree ( much like dealing with GPL zealots ), on our merry way we went. The general lack of respect for mechanics labor was also not endearing.

Can you be more specific on what aspect is not for you? I just want to understand the downside of it amids the cheering.

 

[zedturtle]

Can you be more specific on what aspect is not for you? I just want to understand the downside of it amids the cheering.

If I understand dbolack correctly, they're concerned that taking several normally uncopyrightable concepts ('roll a die', 'compare against a number','success is based on the comparison') and combining them in a novel way might not be protectable if other ORC content appears in the product, because the ORC is so generous in how it defines open game content.

So an innovator who makes the next Advantage/Disadvantage 'breakthrough' can't prevent everyone and their uncle using it in their products. I'm not sure that's a huge problem for me –we had various terms used before the 2016 SRD made it much easier to use the official 5e language (making things much less confusing), and the actual mechanics cannot be copyrighted, although there could be an argument that using the base components in a certain way was so innovative that it is copyrightable.

 

[ECMO3]

Can you be more specific on what aspect is not for you? I just want to understand the downside of it amids the cheering.

I don't know about the poster you questioned, but O think the main downside for me is WOTC is not a part of it, which means their content won't be covered under it, or games built off of their content. That is well over 50% of the market.

Back when WOTC was insistent on deauthorizing the OGL, ORC had a lot more momentum because it looked like it was possible 3rd party creators would have nowhere else to go. Now that this is no longer an imminent threat I think many of them are following the $$$ and going back to WOTC and that makes this less of a priority since WOTC is not included in it.

 

[dbolack]

Can you be more specific on what aspect is not for you? I just want to understand the downside of it amids the cheering.

One view discourages a portion of potential users away, one does not. It is an exercise for the viewer as to whether those license users (re publishers/producers) are a loss to greater to the whole than the idea of not permitting them in the club.

 

[kenada]

If they don’t want to extend the same courtesy to others that was extended to them, they can develop their game without using ORC content. It strikes me as rather entitled to expect otherwise.

 

[kenada]

Since this seems like a rehash of permissive versus copyleft licenses in software, there’s something else one could do that’s like software. If you really want to use something without having to follow the ORC license, approach the publisher for an alternative licensing arrangement. Not all are going to be willing, but I’m sure some would cut a deal for the right amount of money.

 

[Parmandur]

If they don’t want to extend the same courtesy to others that was extended to them, they can develop their game without using ORC content. It strikes me as rather entitled to expect otherwise.

Or make a product using OGL or Creative Commons as a base, both of which allow for more flexibility in controlling IP.

 

[overgeeked]

If they don’t want to extend the same courtesy to others that was extended to them, they can develop their game without using ORC content. It strikes me as rather entitled to expect otherwise.

Exactly. They want to benefit from the work of others, but don’t want others to benefit from their work. Pick a side. Either sharing is good or it’s bad. Don’t take what others are sharing then refuse to share in turn.

 

[kenada]

Or make a product using OGL or Creative Commons as a base, both of which allow for more flexibility in controlling IP.

It’s my understanding that the OGL intended mechanics to be OGC automatically, but publishers declared it Product Identity anyway, and no one pushed the matter. The ORC license clarifies the intent rather explicitly.

I don’t find arguments about “controlling IP” compelling. The implication is it’s okay for someone who uses a work to reserve (if not exercise) the right to impose conditions, but it’s not okay for the originator of a work to do the same.

 

[Parmandur]

It’s my understanding that the OGL intended mechanics to be OGC automatically, but publishers declared it Product Identity anyway, and no one pushed the matter. The ORC license clarifies the intent rather explicitly.

I don’t find arguments about “controlling IP” compelling. The implication is it’s okay for someone who uses a work to reserve (if not exercise) the right to impose conditions, but it’s not okay for the originator of a work to do the same.

Some folks may have intended it a certain way, but that's not how it has been used...and ORC therefore represents a change for publishers, that may be a deal breaker when there are other options on the market.