The OGL: Why is this really happening, and what to do now...

Micah Sweet

Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
has anyone at wotc been approached with this? or there law team? Or do you mean us on here that are as in the dark as anyone?
What I mean by an answer is simply a response, from those who are to some degree in WotC's court on this issue, let alone from WotC themselves. The company has blatantly stated the opposite position to what they are currently espousing, and neither WotC nor those in the community who think it's ok for them to do what they're doing (for some definition of ok, I know there's a spectrum here) seem to have a response to that.

The problem is simply that it's impossible to have a conversation with a corporation, because they don't answer questions.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

What I mean by an answer is simply a response, from those who are to some degree in WotC's court on this issue, let alone from WotC themselves. The company has blatantly stated the opposite position to what they are currently espousing, and neither WotC nor those in the community who think it's ok for them to do what they're doing (for some definition of ok, I know there's a spectrum here) seem to have a response to that.
I don't think I have seen anyone ACTUALLY be on WotC side here... but I know plenty here will say I and a few others have. So let me answer with the only answer ANY of us have...

When it was written it was written with the intent to be forever... it was based on other things in and around it's time, although not a word for word copy, some here say some of the language used was too imprecise. in the 23 years since (actually in the first 7 if I am not mistaken) something changed, and several of the contracts (open software license's) got challenged and changed. The NEW defualt looks somewhat different then the default did in 2000. SO today the law team thinks they can use that 23 years of change (the the OGL was not updated with) as a loop hole.

If I told you in 2000 something and 100% believed it to be true (back then I thought dinosaurs were reptiles) and today I told you something different (they be chickens) it doesn't mean I lied, it means the information I had changed... this is even harder when you realize that the people who said the first thing (dinos are reptiles) and the people who said the second (Dinos are ducks) are not the same people they just work for the same company.
The problem is simply that it's impossible to have a conversation with a corporation, because they don't answer questions.
it is also impossible to have a conversation that we ALL are in the dark on parts of it, and some parts are up in the air (even the experts can't tell us for sure who wins if this goes to a judge)... all we can do is talk it out,
 

eyeheartawk

#1 Enworld Jerk™
When it was written it was written with the intent to be forever... it was based on other things in and around it's time, although not a word for word copy, some here say some of the language used was too imprecise. in the 23 years since (actually in the first 7 if I am not mistaken) something changed, and several of the contracts (open software license's) got challenged and changed. The NEW defualt looks somewhat different then the default did in 2000. SO today the law team thinks they can use that 23 years of change (the the OGL was not updated with) as a loop hole.

If I told you in 2000 something and 100% believed it to be true (back then I thought dinosaurs were reptiles) and today I told you something different (they be chickens) it doesn't mean I lied, it means the information I had changed... this is even harder when you realize that the people who said the first thing (dinos are reptiles) and the people who said the second (Dinos are ducks) are not the same people they just work for the same company.
Except it becomes pretty shady when you yourself are the reason the document never gets updated for further clarity, right?

You can see how that isn't exactly the best and most upstanding set of circumstances?
 

Micah Sweet

Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
I don't think I have seen anyone ACTUALLY be on WotC side here... but I know plenty here will say I and a few others have. So let me answer with the only answer ANY of us have...

When it was written it was written with the intent to be forever... it was based on other things in and around it's time, although not a word for word copy, some here say some of the language used was too imprecise. in the 23 years since (actually in the first 7 if I am not mistaken) something changed, and several of the contracts (open software license's) got challenged and changed. The NEW defualt looks somewhat different then the default did in 2000. SO today the law team thinks they can use that 23 years of change (the the OGL was not updated with) as a loop hole.

If I told you in 2000 something and 100% believed it to be true (back then I thought dinosaurs were reptiles) and today I told you something different (they be chickens) it doesn't mean I lied, it means the information I had changed... this is even harder when you realize that the people who said the first thing (dinos are reptiles) and the people who said the second (Dinos are ducks) are not the same people they just work for the same company.

it is also impossible to have a conversation that we ALL are in the dark on parts of it, and some parts are up in the air (even the experts can't tell us for sure who wins if this goes to a judge)... all we can do is talk it out,
Fair enough. I just have this unreasonable hope that people actually are honest about what they want. I hate political answers, and that's all WotC is giving.
 

Except it becomes pretty shady when you yourself are the reason the document never gets updated for further clarity, right?
yes and no... unless I am mistaken, even come 2007ish the people in charge of WotC was not the same people who were in 2017 let alone the new ones for 2022...
It seems to me (IMO, as an outside observer) the problem was no one (not 3pp not wotc not us fans) paid much attention to open content or law or contracts (not that I would expect us to). I find it funny BECAUSE come 2008, 2009 was the time that this big brick hammer would have helped WotC MORE then now... stopping retroclones including but not limited to pathfinder from compeating with the then newest edition of the game... I could argue the NEXT best time isn't 2023 but 2014, when if they had known this was even a possibility they could have ended the OGL pre 5e...
the fact is that the people who think this loop hole will work today were not at WotC TOO update it or not.
You can see how that isn't exactly the best and most upstanding set of circumstances?
this is where everyone gets me wrong... I don't think ANYTHING that ANY big company does is the best or most upstanding for it's customer base and/or rivals and partners...
 

Fair enough. I just have this unreasonable hope that people actually are honest about what they want. I hate political answers, and that's all WotC is giving.
on this we agree... I think they would garner MORE good will if they said "Hey, we see a shot to take down our competition when we are on teh upswing and we are taking it, while trying to give enough back to balance it"
 

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top