The OGL 1.1 is not an Open License

[Umbran]

So you make 2 companies and keep your OGL 1.0a work under company 1 and the OGL 1.1 work under company 2. That seems fairly trivial to get around?

That becomes a liability if you don't keep the finances separate, which is non-trivial.

 

[Alzrius]

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.

If you change the bolded part to read:

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.

Doesn't that mean that you can use new material under an old version of the license (so long as the "new material" is designated as Open Game Content that is released under any version, past or future, of the OGL)?

 

[Umbran]

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

That seems more like a carrot than a stick - "If you use this new license, you also get access to sell on our digital platform, which you couldn't do before!"

 

[Bedrockgames]

I think whatever the final legal interoperation I'd say section 9 isn't very straightforward in regards to the new license for most of the lay people who are interpreting this to make business decisions

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Possibly - Bob sues Jane as she didn't have a license to use OGL 1.1 for his product as the terms of OGL 1.0/1.0a are in conflict with the terms of OGL 1.1 and part of OGL 1.0/1.0a is she must include a similar license for others to use the content she derived from Bob?

wow... that is a mess.

I was just thinking how it sucks (like when a comic book writer watches his creation go on to be a billion dollar IP) for Bob, but if bob COULD sue that would be weird... the open part (yes as @Umbran said open with limits) means that you REALLY need to understand what the wording means, and why you really need a lawyer on payroll.

 

[FrogReaver]

That seems more like a carrot than a stick - "If you use this new license, you also get access to sell on our digital platform, which you couldn't do before!"

For DMs Guild they could before. So that’s stick. For beyond I think whether that’s stick or carrot is in the eyes of the beholder.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I know I wouldn't want to start a second company. I can't speak for others.

one of the perfectly legal but VERY ETHICLLY DUBIOUS tricks I see people pull is open multi businesses and or organizations and then how they interact with each other gets around legal or regulatory restrictions...

The worst I ever had to deal with was a VERY big brand that actually qualified for small business' benefits by having 6 or more businesses and 1 not for profit that all kept some small amount of the job and as such employees to keep each at 49 or less even though all 6 had the same family as the owner/higher ups, then made whole sections of there workforce for several (I don't think all) act as independent contractors.

Then again I used to do the books for a strip club that somehow didn't mange to keep small business benefits because they didn't make all there staff have to be independent contractors... like they took a hit in multi ways to make sure the employees didn't.

 

[Fanaelialae]

For DMs Guild they could before. So that’s stick. For beyond I think whether that’s stick or carrot is in the eyes of the beholder.

I don't think they'll remove the ability to have older content on DMs Guild (otherwise, as soon as this went into effect, DMs Guild would have to stop selling all the old content, which would not be in WotCs best interest, since they make money off those sales and would alienate their creators). Also, I was under the impression that DMs Guild content wasn't OGL to begin with, but rather some separate agreement (though I could be wrong).

 

[Reynard]

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.

The underlined is the important part here. IF OGL 1.1 is in fact a new version of OGL 1.0a, then anything released under it is released to all versions of the OGL, forward and backward.

 

[Umbran]

For DMs Guild they could before. So that’s stick. For beyond I think whether that’s stick or carrot is in the eyes of the beholder.

Then it is digital platforms, plural, because DMsGuild and D&D Beyond are not the same platform.