Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
Publishing Business & Licensing
We got an official leak of One D&D OGL 1.1! Watch Our Discussion And Reactions!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ondath" data-source="post: 8877886" data-attributes="member: 7031770"><p>Well, since a lot of people depended on Section 9 to say they could stay in v1.0a without switching to v1.1 (since Section 9 is also what allows people to mix-and-match license versions with the content they make), authorisation factoring in Section 9 does seem pretty relevant to me.</p><p></p><p>I believe the line of reasoning is that, while the OGL copyright notice allows you to mark your game content as under the OGL, the notice itself is, for weird legal shenanigans, <em>not</em> under the OGL. The license text is under the copyright of WotC, and that means that any reproduction of the OGL by sublicensees still uses the copyrighted notice by Wizards. For instance, this is what Evil Hat Productions' OGL text looks like, even though FATE has nothing to do with D&D:</p><p></p><p>This then seems to imply that the license text itself is something that's separate from the OGL, and the OGL's validity stems from the original copyrighted license text that belongs to Wizards. As a result (the logic goes), if WotC deauthorises OGL v1.0a in a new version of the license, their change trickles down to sublicensees, and this might stop them from issuing OGL v1.0a licenses too.</p><p></p><p>Of course, this is very, very different from what Dancey & co. intended when they first designed the OGL. But mind you, the people in charge of D&D (and WotC at large) are not those people, and it's the second group that now decides how the OGL should be interpreted. If WotC goes for the worst-case scenario and decides to endanger the entire OGL-dependent side of the industry, things will inevitably go to court. Perhaps WotC might lose and OGL v1.0a might stay because the license was intended to be available forever. But even to get that result, there'd need to be a protracted legal battle against Hasbro. And that can't be good news for the hobby in general.</p><p></p><p>TL;DR: They're altering the deal. Let's pray they don't alter it further.</p><p><img src="https://media0.giphy.com/media/35LBsjpYiye1W/200.gif" alt="flights ua GIF" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " data-size="" style="" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ondath, post: 8877886, member: 7031770"] Well, since a lot of people depended on Section 9 to say they could stay in v1.0a without switching to v1.1 (since Section 9 is also what allows people to mix-and-match license versions with the content they make), authorisation factoring in Section 9 does seem pretty relevant to me. I believe the line of reasoning is that, while the OGL copyright notice allows you to mark your game content as under the OGL, the notice itself is, for weird legal shenanigans, [I]not[/I] under the OGL. The license text is under the copyright of WotC, and that means that any reproduction of the OGL by sublicensees still uses the copyrighted notice by Wizards. For instance, this is what Evil Hat Productions' OGL text looks like, even though FATE has nothing to do with D&D: This then seems to imply that the license text itself is something that's separate from the OGL, and the OGL's validity stems from the original copyrighted license text that belongs to Wizards. As a result (the logic goes), if WotC deauthorises OGL v1.0a in a new version of the license, their change trickles down to sublicensees, and this might stop them from issuing OGL v1.0a licenses too. Of course, this is very, very different from what Dancey & co. intended when they first designed the OGL. But mind you, the people in charge of D&D (and WotC at large) are not those people, and it's the second group that now decides how the OGL should be interpreted. If WotC goes for the worst-case scenario and decides to endanger the entire OGL-dependent side of the industry, things will inevitably go to court. Perhaps WotC might lose and OGL v1.0a might stay because the license was intended to be available forever. But even to get that result, there'd need to be a protracted legal battle against Hasbro. And that can't be good news for the hobby in general. TL;DR: They're altering the deal. Let's pray they don't alter it further. [IMG alt="flights ua GIF"]https://media0.giphy.com/media/35LBsjpYiye1W/200.gif[/IMG] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
Publishing Business & Licensing
We got an official leak of One D&D OGL 1.1! Watch Our Discussion And Reactions!
Top