• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

WotC Announces OGL 1.1 -- Revised Terms, Royalties, and Annual Revenue Reporting

There has been a lot of speculation recently about WotC's plans regarding the Open Gaming License and the upcoming One D&D. Today, WotC shared some information. In short, they will be producing a new Open Gaming License (note that the previous OGL 1.0a will still exist, and can still be used). However, for those who use the new OGL 1.1, which will be released in early 2023, there will be some...

There has been a lot of speculation recently about WotC's plans regarding the Open Gaming License and the upcoming One D&D. Today, WotC shared some information.

In short, they will be producing a new Open Gaming License (note that the previous OGL 1.0a will still exist, and can still be used). However, for those who use the new OGL 1.1, which will be released in early 2023, there will be some limitations added with regards the type of product which can use it, and -- possibly controversially -- reporting to WotC your annual OGL-related revenue.

They are also adding a royalty for those third party publishers who make more than $750K per year.

Interestingly, only books and 'static electronic files' like ebooks and PDFs will be compatible with the new OGL, meaning that apps, web pages, and the like will need to stick to the old OGL 1.0a.

There will, of course, be a lot of debate and speculation over what this actually means for third party creators, and how it will affect them. Some publishers like Paizo (for Pathfinder) and others will likely simply continue to use the old OGL. The OGL 1.0a allows WotC to update the license, but allows licensees to continue to use previous versions "to copy, modify and distribute any Open Game Content originally distributed under any version of this License".


wotc-new-logo-3531303324.jpg



1. Will One D&D include an SRD/be covered by an OGL?

Yes. First, we’re designing One D&D with fifth edition backwards compatibility, so all existing creator content that is compatible with fifth edition will also be compatible with One D&D. Second, we will update the SRD for One D&D as we complete its development—development that is informed by the results of playtests that we’re conducting with hundreds of thousands of D&D players now.

2. Will the OGL terms change?

Yes. We will release version 1.1 of the OGL in early 2023.

The OGL needs an update to ensure that it keeps doing what it was intended to do—allow the D&D community’s independent creators to build and play and grow the game we all love—without allowing things like third-parties to mint D&D NFTs and large businesses to exploit our intellectual property.

So, what’s changing?

First, we’re making sure that OGL 1.1 is clear about what it covers and what it doesn’t. OGL 1.1 makes clear it only covers material created for use in or as TTRPGs, and those materials are only ever permitted as printed media or static electronic files (like epubs and PDFs). Other types of content, like videos and video games, are only possible through the Wizards of the Coast Fan Content Policy or a custom agreement with us. To clarify: Outside of printed media and static electronic files, the OGL doesn’t cover it.

Will this affect the D&D content and services players use today? It shouldn’t. The top VTT platforms already have custom agreements with Wizards to do what they do. D&D merchandise, like minis and novels, were never intended to be part of the OGL and OGL 1.1 won’t change that. Creators wishing to leverage D&D for those forms of expression will need, as they always have needed, custom agreements between us.

Second, we’re updating the OGL to offer different terms to creators who choose to make free, share-alike content and creators who want to sell their products.

What does this mean for you as a creator? If you’re making share-alike content, very little is going to change from what you’re already used to.

If you’re making commercial content, relatively little is going to change for most creators. For most of you who are selling custom content, here are the new things you’ll need to do:
  1. Accept the license terms and let us know what you’re offering for sale
  2. Report OGL-related revenue annually (if you make more than $50,000 in a year)
  3. Include a Creator Product badge on your work
When we roll out OGL 1.1, we will also provide explanatory videos, FAQs, and a web portal for registration to make navigating these requirements as easy and intuitive as possible. We’ll also have help available to creators to navigate the new process.

For the fewer than 20 creators worldwide who make more than $750,000 in income in a year, we will add a royalty starting in 2024. So, even for the creators making significant money selling D&D supplements and games, no royalties will be due for 2023 and all revenue below $750,000 in future years will be royalty-free.

Bottom line: The OGL is not going away. You will still be able to create new D&D content, publish it anywhere, and game with your friends and followers in all the ways that make this game and community so great. The thousands of creators publishing across Kickstarter, DMsGuild, and more are a critical part of the D&D experience, and we will continue to support and encourage them to do that through One D&D and beyond.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Prime_Evil

Adventurer
I'll see if I can dig out the reference. It came from the Basic Roleplaying forums about two years ago. It was part of the statements made by Rick Meints and MoB upon the release of the BRP System Reference Document and the BRP-OGL. Someone asked them to explain why they didn't go with the OGL for the BRP System Reference Document. From my understanding, they had legal advice that because "wizards or designated Agents" had the power to update the licence at any time, the contractual relationship created would always be between WoTC and the end user. This advice also noted the text of the OGL is text is the property of Wizards of the Coast, Inc with All Rights Reserved. This rendered the use of the OGL by other companies problematic. Indeed, Chaosium representatives argued that because the legal relationship was always between WoTC and the end licensee, it was not possible to release derivative works under the OGL not created using WoTC IP. Some folks argued that the reason for the separate BRP-OGL was the addition of extra terms around Prohibited Content (to prevent licensees from making games in direct competition with Chaosium products).
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Can someone else put your 1.0a stuff into a more restrictive 1.1 based on how 1.0a is written?
We don't know, maybe, we haven't seen 1.1 at all, but how would it matter? If you released Open Game Content under 1.0/a, what difference does it make to you if your Open Game Content can also be used according to the terms of 1.1? You still released it under 1.0/a, so some fourth party could still come along and use your OGC under 1.0/a even if a third party used it under 1.1. Like, your OGC wouldn't become "more restricted" just because another party used it under 1.1.
 

Prime_Evil

Adventurer
We don't know, maybe, we haven't seen 1.1 at all, but how would it matter? If you released Open Game Content under 1.0/a, what difference does it make to you if your Open Game Content can also be used according to the terms of 1.1? You still released it under 1.0/a, so some fourth party could still come along and use your OGC under 1.0/a even if a third party used it under 1.1. Like, your OGC wouldn't become "more restricted" just because another party used it under 1.1.
I suspect access to the OneD&D SRD may require agreement to a simple clickwrap agreement stating that you agree to use version 1.1 of the OGL. This will be problematic if it requires you to migrate existing material released under the OGL to the latest version of the license as a condition of access. But this isn't clear yet - we haven't seen the new version of the license.
 

Cadence

Legend
Supporter
We don't know, maybe, we haven't seen 1.1 at all, but how would it matter? If you released Open Game Content under 1.0/a, what difference does it make to you if your Open Game Content can also be used according to the terms of 1.1? You still released it under 1.0/a, so some fourth party could still come along and use your OGC under 1.0/a even if a third party used it under 1.1. Like, your OGC wouldn't become "more restricted" just because another party used it under 1.1.

If someone makes 1.0a stuff using my 1.0a stuff, I can borrow that new stuff back for my future 1.0a work. That feels like a major part of putting something in 1.0a.
 

I suspect access to the OneD&D SRD may require agreement to a simple clickwrap agreement stating that you agree to use version 1.1 of the OGL. This will be problematic if it requires you to migrate existing material released under the OGL to the latest version of the license as a condition of access. But this isn't clear yet - we haven't seen the new version of the license.
Okay, but even then, @Cadence didn't accept the 1.1 agreement, the other party that used their OGC did, so what does @Cadence care if the other party accepted 1.1 or not? Maybe the other party ends up in violation of the terms of 1.1 by agreeing to "migrate" OGC that they took from @Cadence when they don't have the authority to "migrate" it, but I'm still not seeing how that matters to @Cadence.
 


Cadence

Legend
Supporter
Now I'm really confused! Should that first "1.0a" be a "1.1" instead?
I should have added a second paragraph. "If they can make 1.1 stuff using my 1.0a stuff, and 1.1 is written that I can't use those new game rule derivatives of my own work in new 1.0a things, then that feels bad to me."
 

I should have added a second paragraph. "If they can make 1.1 stuff using my 1.0a stuff, and 1.1 is written that I can't use those new game rule derivatives of my own work in new 1.0a things, then that feels bad to me."
Okay, yeah, and again, we don't know. My guess is that you'll be able to use any OGC from anything licensed under 1.1 (to keep Section 9 happy), but you won't be able to use any new category of content limited to 1.1 (call it "One System Rules" or something). But it's just a guess.
 

mamba

Legend
I'll see if I can dig out the reference. It came from the Basic Roleplaying forums about two years ago
The closest thing I found was a reference to it "MOB has just stated in a thread at RPG.NET that Chaosium have no problem with the Legend OGL and wouldn't challenge it. They are not sure that the OGL is valid outside of D20, though, and are unsure if it would stand a legal challenge.". That was posted on 3/29/2020


Maybe that helps you ;)
 


Remove ads

Remove ads

Top