Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 8898537" data-attributes="member: 71699">I felt more than one concern is conflated into the second option, but I chose it because to me the first option is to me an unnecessarily black and white position. On the one hand, I think there are possible future OGL versions that could even be improvements on the original. And on the other hand, I think if Hasbro just said - look, going forward it's our IP and we want a walled garden - then they would just be making a commercial decision not dissimilar or any more immoral than any company that decides to ringfence its IP. If they were to try and revoke the OGL, there are versions of that, that might be fair and equitable to those who have relied on it.And on the other hand, my view is not really as simplistic as - doesn't affect my table, will give money to a corporation if I like their product regardless of what they do. But on that, there is a long list of things I will not sustain a company from my own pocket to do, and licensing shennanigans are pretty far down that list. Commercial conflicts are not the same as criminal conflicts, and typically amoral rather than immoral.</blockquote>