Ryan Dancey -- Hasbro Cannot Deauthorize OGL

I reached out to the architect of the original Open Gaming License, former VP of Wizard of the Coast, Ryan Dancey, and asked his opinion about the current plan by WotC to 'deauthorize' the current OGL in favour of a new one.

He responded as follows:

Yeah my public opinion is that Hasbro does not have the power to deauthorize a version of the OGL. If that had been a power that we wanted to reserve for Hasbro, we would have enumerated it in the license. I am on record numerous places in email and blogs and interviews saying that the license could never be revoked.

Ryan also maintains the Open Gaming Foundation.

As has been noted previously, even WotC in its own OGL FAQ did not believe at the time that the licence could be revoked.

7. Can't Wizards of the Coast change the License in a way that I wouldn't like?

Yes, it could. However, the License already defines what will happen to content that has been previously distributed using an earlier version, in Section 9. As a result, even if Wizards made a change you disagreed with, you could continue to use an earlier, acceptable version at your option. In other words, there's no reason for Wizards to ever make a change that the community of people using the Open Gaming License would object to, because the community would just ignore the change anyway.

​

 

[wingsandsword]

WoTC don't need to spread FUD. They just need Drivetrhurpg and Kickstarter to refuse to carry material released under OGL v.1.0a.

The entire RPG industry is not just two websites.

 

[Morrus]

The entire RPG industry is not just two websites.

For many smaller creators it is. You have to be fairly successful to have a decent revenue stream from your own store, and even then not having DTRPG or KS is a huge percentage of your business.

 

[wingsandsword]

For many smaller creators it is. You have to be fairly successful to have a decent revenue stream from your own store, and even then not having DTRPG or KS is a huge percentage of your business.

I'm not even talking about commercial publishers.

Right now, today, if I wanted to make my own RPG that's derived from D&D 3.x, 5e, d20 Modern, and other OGL d20 variants, and just put it out there and post it online and share it, I can, as long as I follow the very generous terms of the OGL 1.0a.

If, big if, this leaked WotC OGL 1.1 is completely real and something they implement, that would be copyright infringement for me to do so (assuming the rescinding of OGL 1.0a is legally valid, which courts may rule on at some point).

If the OGL 1.0a is still valid, it wouldn't be.

This stomps on fans making and distributing their own D&D-related materials just as much as it does on commercial publications.

I remember quite well the 1990's "T$R" era, when fans were sent Cease & Desist letters simply for posting home-brew spells or monsters, or posting their homebrew campaign settings, because they referenced D&D IP elements in those postings. That's when I started gaming, and I was introduced to D&D by people who had a seething hatred of TSR because of the culture of fear and distrust that TSR created. The OGL is what silenced that and assured fans that wouldn't come back, that WotC wasn't interested in going after fans and instead supported fans making their own D&D content, as long as it was within some pretty generous terms.

. . .WotC is making just as much a threat at fans making homebrew and sharing it as they are with commercial publishers by rescinding the OGL 1.0a. While OGL 1.1 may be friendlier towards non-commercial fan productions, the very fact that OGL 1.1 says it can be rescinded at any time by WotC means it's really no license at all and cannot be trusted. . .since we've already seen WotC rescind (or try to rescind) a license that was even intended to not be able to be rescinded in the first place. You'd have to be a fool to ever use OGL 1.1, under any circumstance, even as a fan making a completely non-commercial production.

 

[bedir than]

I'm not even talking about commercial publishers.

Right now, today, if I wanted to make my own RPG that's derived from D&D 3.x, 5e, d20 Modern, and other OGL d20 variants, and just put it out there and post it online and share it, I can, as long as I follow the very generous terms of the OGL 1.0a.

If, big if, this leaked WotC OGL 1.1 is completely real and something they implement, that would be copyright infringement for me to do so (assuming the rescinding of OGL 1.0a is legally valid, which courts may rule on at some point).

If the OGL 1.0a is still valid, it wouldn't be.

This stomps on fans making and distributing their own D&D-related materials just as much as it does on commercial publications.

I remember quite well the 1990's "T$R" era, when fans were sent Cease & Desist letters simply for posting home-brew spells or monsters, or posting their homebrew campaign settings, because they referenced D&D IP elements in those postings. That's when I started gaming, and I was introduced to D&D by people who had a seething hatred of TSR because of the culture of fear and distrust that TSR created. The OGL is what silenced that and assured fans that wouldn't come back, that WotC wasn't interested in going after fans and instead supported fans making their own D&D content, as long as it was within some pretty generous terms.

. . .WotC is making just as much a threat at fans making homebrew and sharing it as they are with commercial publishers by rescinding the OGL 1.0a. While OGL 1.1 may be friendlier towards non-commercial fan productions, the very fact that OGL 1.1 says it can be rescinded at any time by WotC means it's really no license at all and cannot be trusted. . .since we've already seen WotC rescind (or try to rescind) a license that was even intended to not be able to be rescinded in the first place. You'd have to be a fool to ever use OGL 1.1, under any circumstance, even as a fan making a completely non-commercial production.

The Fan Content Policy is unchanged.
Nothing in the OGL 1.1 revokes that

 

[Reynard]

The Fan Content Policy is unchanged.
Nothing in the OGL 1.1 revokes that

The fan content policy does not cover game mechanics. You have to use the OGL for that.

 

[wingsandsword]

The Fan Content Policy is unchanged.
Nothing in the OGL 1.1 revokes that

A "fan content policy" is just that, a policy.

It can change at any time. WotC can just arbitrarily say they don't allow fans to produce anything for D&D, at any time, at their discretion.

It's as revocable as OGL 1.1, so it's meaningless and worthless.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

This stomps on fans making and distributing their own D&D-related materials just as much as it does on commercial publications.

I remember quite well the 1990's "T$R" era, when fans were sent Cease & Desist letters simply for posting home-brew spells or monsters,

Okay this new OGL is bad, but it's not that.

If you put stuff up for free no issue.
If you put stuff sell it and make less then 50k a year no issue.

I can't imagine anything I or my friends make ever being effected. Even if I wanted to it would be through the DMsGuild.

THe issue isn't fans. The issue is 100% the people who do this professionally. The people who have mortgage and rent payments they make by selling D&D related stuff... not some dude that throws a few things up on the web.

 

[bedir than]

The fan content policy does not cover game mechanics. You have to use the OGL for that.

No. I don't.
They've absolutely read my website and never contacted me for violating the OGL by not publishing under it

EN World isn't violating the OGL by existing

 

[bedir than]

A "fan content policy" is just that, a policy.

It can change at any time. WotC can just arbitrarily say they don't allow fans to produce anything for D&D, at any time, at their discretion.

It's as revocable as OGL 1.1, so it's meaningless and worthless.

The mythology that WotC would chase down the millions of people who have shared their own created content for free and/or go to legal war with the publishers of that is hilarious.

WotC isn't going to battle with Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest or Chad down the street

 

[Minigiant]

A "fan content policy" is just that, a policy.

It can change at any time. WotC can just arbitrarily say they don't allow fans to produce anything for D&D, at any time, at their discretion.

It's as revocable as OGL 1.1, so it's meaningless and worthless.

The fn contentpolicy can be changed but it likely wont be as it is free press with no competitive lane with the main IP.