Yet every one of these things I read or watch (I don't watch many) start from the assumption that WOTC is going to shut everyone else down, that anything they say is a lie. Proof that everything they say is a lie? We just told you it was a lie!
The
original post on D&D Beyond in response to rumors before the holidays lied to us. It claimed the OGL was intended to "allow the D&D community’s independent creators to build and play and grow the game we all love—without allowing things like third-parties to mint D&D NFTs and large businesses to exploit our intellectual property."
Sure, NFTs were not imagined by Dancey in 2000. But other than NFTs being generally horrible, I don't see how you could use them with the OGL anyway, since the OGL relies on copying while NFTs are an attempt to limit copying. And if you were going to do a D&D-based NFT, it would not be of a rules element of the kind you have in the SRD, it'd be of something in a setting, like a bored Elminster or something. And as for the second point: yes, allowing other businesses to "exploit" your intellectual property WAS the point.
It also talks about the OGL as if it is something D&D-exclusive. It's not. The OGL was always intended to be used for a variety of games, and plenty of games that have nothing to do with D&D have used it to establish regimens for third-party creations.
It then goes on to say that the OGL is only intended for "material created for use in or as TTRPGs, and those materials are only ever permitted as printed media or static electronic files." That is a whole lot of bull. The original authors of the OGL always said it could be used for whatever you felt appropriate.
So after that, you might excuse people for not giving Wizards the benefit of doubt if their statements stretch the truth.
It's impossible to know what the real impact of the OGL 2.0 would be because the rhetoric feels so over the top. But saying that I think the rhetoric is over the top, that WOTC is not attempting to "deauthorize third party publishers ability to write [product] for D&D" based on what they've said and released, is not the same as saying that there are no concerns. It's trying to understand a balance that isn't reflected in virtually everything being published.
Yes, they are. Even in the leaked revised version, they still maintain the right to revise it at any time, and no-one in their right mind would agree to a deal like that. That is the same as denying 3PP the ability to write material.