The OGL 1.1 is not an Open License

[see]

Which means, if I'm reading you right, if you're new to publishing and want to put something out under 1.0/1.0a you gotta do it before 1.1 is released. Get in before the lock, as it were.

Is that what you're saying?

No, there's no time limit. Open Game Content released under the Open Game License 1.0a can always be used under the Open Game License 1.0a.

Now, any given publisher might enter into an agreement that limits its right to do so, but that doesn't affect anyone else's ability to sit down in the year 2525 and release their own D&D 3rd edition-compatible Pocket Player's Handbook.

 

[pemerton]

I'm not sure there's a clean way to end the perpetual royalty free license - especially since that license was created so others could also make derivative works of such 3rd party content. Standing might be an issue if no one else had used the OGL license attached to the 3rd party product but if they had then things get really complicated legally.

They don't need to end anyone's perpetual licence. They don't even need to retract the offer to license the 5e SRD under the OGL v 1.0a. They just need to define the scope of the OGL 1.1 licence in such a way that stuff that is both (i) 3PP-created and (ii) SRD-derived falls under the new licence. Because people can do whatever they want with their own stuff - including WotC as one of the "people" - this wouldn't breach any legal obligations as far as I can see.

What it would do is create two "ecosystems" - a 1.0/1.0a one, and a 1.1 one. Which is what @estar is concerned about. Some stuff would be trapped in the old ecosystem, because for whatever reason its authors don't release it under v 1.1 (maybe they don't want to; maybe it's too hard to untangle all the OGC so that they can do so lawfully).

The incentives for entering the new ecosystem would be (i) access to the revised SRD and (ii) perhaps access to D&D Beyond etc.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

The OP is spot on! This is not an "Open" license, it exerts far too much control over how you publish the supposedly "open" content for that. What happens in 20 years when all documents are expected to be at least somewhat interactive, $750K is about 5K in today's dollars, and nobody knows who should receive any royalties after Hasbro's implosion in '37?

Some people point out that the license isn't finished yet, and I agree. If there's any interpretation of section 9 of the OGL1.0 the that would let people publish content based on the 1D&D SRD using the old OGL, we can be sure they will patch that loophole before release.

Now, OGL1.1 not being an open license doesn't mean there's not a good business case for entering into it. Many 3PPs will probably make good money with 1D&D products and not have any problem paying the modest royalties. But the OGL1.1 isn't going to help secure the future of D&D the way the OGL1.0 has.

 

[jdrakeh]

This type of hyperbole doesn't help the conversation, especially since it's riddled with errors.

Yeah. By the OP's terms, many CC licenses aren't open, either. They are; the OP is just incorrect in many of his assertions. Notably:

As the definition of open content means you can use it in the manner you see fit.

No version of the OGL has been "open content meaning you can use it in the manner you see fit" - every version of the OGL to date has had multiple restrictions and conditions that a publisher must adhere to in order to be in compliance (not using Product Identity without express permission, for example). Relevant restriction from the OGL 1.0a:

7. Use of Product Identity: You agree not to Use any Product Identity, including as an indication as to compatibility, except as expressly licensed in another, independent Agreement with the owner of each element of that Product Identity. You agree not to indicate compatibility or co-adaptability with any Trademark or Registered Trademark in conjunction with a work containing Open Game Content except as expressly licensed in another, independent Agreement with the owner of such Trademark or Registered Trademark. The use of any Product Identity in Open Game Content does not constitute a challenge to the ownership of that Product Identity. The owner of any Product Identity used in Open Game Content shall retain all rights, title and interest in and to that Product Identity.

There are other restrictions, as well. It's certainly not a free for all, do whatever you like license as the OP implies.

 

[MarioEvilDM]

This has been a pleasure ready you guys\girls it's rare to see a discussion to find the truth and not a debate to sale a point of view. it is refreshing to read people with INT 15-16

 

[S'mon]

According to Section 9, if it is in fact an updated version of the OGL, and the 1D&D SRD is released under it, you can use the 1D&D SRD with v 1.0 of the OGL.

Not by my reading:

9. Updating the License: Wizards or its designated Agents may publish updated
versions of this License. You may use any authorized version of this License to
copy, modify and distribute any Open Game Content originally distributed under
any version of this License.

It says you can use old material under a new version of the license. It does not say you can use new material under an old version of the license.

 

[FrogReaver]

They don't need to end anyone's perpetual licence. They don't even need to retract the offer to license the 5e SRD under the OGL v 1.0a. They just need to define the scope of the OGL 1.1 licence in such a way that stuff that is both (i) 3PP-created and (ii) SRD-derived falls under the new licence. Because people can do whatever they want with their own stuff - including WotC as one of the "people" - this wouldn't breach any legal obligations as far as I can see.

What it would do is create two "ecosystems" - a 1.0/1.0a one, and a 1.1 one. Which is what @estar is concerned about. Some stuff would be trapped in the old ecosystem, because for whatever reason its authors don't release it under v 1.1 (maybe they don't want to; maybe it's too hard to untangle all the OGC so that they can do so lawfully).

The incentives for entering the new ecosystem would be (i) access to the revised SRD and (ii) perhaps access to D&D Beyond etc.

What I’m saying is that SRD 5.1 currently includes the OGL 1.0 which says it can be reproduced. They can’t put the genie back in the bottle. Anyone can get a copy of SRD 5.1 that uses the 1.0 OGL even if WOTC ceases to provide it because anyone can reproduce the 5.1 SRD with the 1.0 OGL, which then provides the new user a 1.0 OGL license to produce 5.1 SRD content. If the 5.1 SRD wasn’t reproducible under the current 1.0 license then they could do as you suggest but it is so I don’t see how they can. At least that’s my current line of thought.

 

[eyeheartawk]

I think everyone is in agreement that right now there is no reason to use OGL1.1. Even if they make a new SRD and they explicitly bind that to OGL 1.1 you can just use OGL 1.0A and clone the content changing some words around. I mean, you could make a 5e rule clone using OGL 1.0A and the 3E SRD if you really wanted to.

Which, to me, means that we're all just waiting for the other shoe to drop. What's the carrot? That I think will tell us what direction this is all going more than anything else.

 

[DarkCrisis]

I am pretty sure that you can't just change a licence one sided. So any fear that they will suddenly charge people who used that old license wothout paying royalties is unfounded. It is also unfounded that they can somehow lower the bar later with 1.2 or so for those who use 1.1.
The made a license. You agreed to it by printing it in the book. So pathfinder is safe as is everything else.
I am not a lawyer or an IP lawyer for that matter.

 

[FrogReaver]

I think everyone is in agreement that right now there is no reason to use OGL1.1. Even if they make a new SRD and they explicitly bind that to OGL 1.1 you can just use OGL 1.0A and clone the content changing some words around. I mean, you could make a 5e rule clone using OGL 1.0A and the 3E SRD if you really wanted to.

Which, to me, means that we're all just waiting for the other shoe to drop. What's the carrot? That I think will tell us what direction this is all going more than anything else.

I think it’s going to be more stick. Can’t sell on Wotc digital platforms without adopting 1.1 OGL.