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
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!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
Publishing Business & Licensing
What would an incontrovertible irrevocable OGL 2.0 look like?
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="Kinematics" data-source="post: 8890567" data-attributes="member: 6932123"><p>Unfortunately, the public domain is fraught with uncertainty. There are legal arguments that you <em>can't</em> voluntarily put something into the public domain, if you hold the copyright for it.</p><p></p><p>Part of the point of licenses like the GPL is to bypass that uncertainty by using the existing copyright laws to <em>force</em> the provided content to be, and remain, as free as possible.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I had written up a bunch of ideas, but going over them piece-by-piece leads me to believe that a Creative Commons (CC) license might be entirely sufficient.</p><p></p><p>One of the key differences of the OGL vs other open licenses was that it allows you to only share <em>part</em> of your copyrighted content, and reserve rights to other parts. That felt distinct enough that I thought it might be worth having its own license for.</p><p></p><p>But then I realized that what publishers have shared have generally been SRDs — curated collections of the original copyrighted work that include only and exactly what's being shared as open content. And ultimately, that's the only thing you have to share. So, rather than saying, "D&D is open content; this is the portion we will allow you to use.", you just say, "This curated document is being shared as open content. It happens to be the core rules that D&D uses."</p><p></p><p>In other words, you don't need the license to define the split in open content; you just need to separate that out into its own document, and share that document normally as CC content.</p><p></p><p>CC then has variations on the basic license, so that you can say that users of the content must share their remixes, may not share their remixes, or are free to share or not share their remixes; and do so in either a commercial or non-commercial fashion. That covers pretty much everything. All other issues, such as irrevocability or non-partisan stewardship are already handled.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Kinematics, post: 8890567, member: 6932123"] Unfortunately, the public domain is fraught with uncertainty. There are legal arguments that you [I]can't[/I] voluntarily put something into the public domain, if you hold the copyright for it. Part of the point of licenses like the GPL is to bypass that uncertainty by using the existing copyright laws to [I]force[/I] the provided content to be, and remain, as free as possible. I had written up a bunch of ideas, but going over them piece-by-piece leads me to believe that a Creative Commons (CC) license might be entirely sufficient. One of the key differences of the OGL vs other open licenses was that it allows you to only share [i]part[/i] of your copyrighted content, and reserve rights to other parts. That felt distinct enough that I thought it might be worth having its own license for. But then I realized that what publishers have shared have generally been SRDs — curated collections of the original copyrighted work that include only and exactly what's being shared as open content. And ultimately, that's the only thing you have to share. So, rather than saying, "D&D is open content; this is the portion we will allow you to use.", you just say, "This curated document is being shared as open content. It happens to be the core rules that D&D uses." In other words, you don't need the license to define the split in open content; you just need to separate that out into its own document, and share that document normally as CC content. CC then has variations on the basic license, so that you can say that users of the content must share their remixes, may not share their remixes, or are free to share or not share their remixes; and do so in either a commercial or non-commercial fashion. That covers pretty much everything. All other issues, such as irrevocability or non-partisan stewardship are already handled. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
Publishing Business & Licensing
What would an incontrovertible irrevocable OGL 2.0 look like?
Top