NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8868059" data-attributes="member: 42582">Under the OGL, everyone who has entered into the licence with WotC has permission, which cannot be revoked, to distribute WotC's SRD as OGC. So you don't need to "get in before the lock". But it seems to me that it would affect who you have to cite in your section 15 copyright declaration.In my view, nothing. As per my paragraph just above, I don't think this affects stuff in the 5e SRD.But if there is new material in the revised SRD, it may not be usable pursuant to the terms of the OGL v 1.0/1.0a. I say "may" because there are complexities. [USER=463]@S'mon[/USER] has said that perhaps section 9 of the OGL v 1.0/1.0a might govern a licence to use the revised SRD - and although I can't myself see what the legal mechanism is whereby that would happen, I trust S'mon's instincts on this because he's an expert in the field.The other possibility that I've raised - but someone years ago suggested it to me in the context of Paizo's use of the 3.0 SRD as a basis for use of 3.5 material - is that the relationship between the 5e SRD and the revised SRD might be such that the revised SRD is still within the scope of the permission granted in respect of the 5e SRD under the OGL v 1.0a.EDIT: I just saw S'mon's post #229. Which pours cold water on the preceding paragraph. That leaves me puzzled as to how/why Paizo was citing only the 3.0 SRD in its copyright declarations for works it was publishing which included 3.5 SRD material (eg the polar ray spell). I doubt that Paizo was simply careless.</blockquote>

Verification