WotC Talks OGL... Again! Draft Coming Jan 20th With Feedback Survey; v1 De-Auth Still On

Following last week's partial walk-back on the upcoming Open Game Licence terms, WotC has posted another update about the way forward. The new update begins with another apology and a promise to be more transparent. To that end, WotC proposes to release the draft of the new OGL this week, with a two-week survey feedback period following it...

Following last week's partial walk-back on the upcoming Open Game Licence terms, WotC has posted another update about the way forward.

Screen Shot 2023-01-09 at 10.45.12 AM.png

The new update begins with another apology and a promise to be more transparent. To that end, WotC proposes to release the draft of the new OGL this week, with a two-week survey feedback period following it.


They also list a number of points of clarity --
  • Videos, accessories, VTT content, DMs Guild will not be affected by the new license, none of which is related to the OGL
  • The royalties and ownership rights clauses are, as previously noted, going away
OGL v1 Still Being 'De-Authorized'
However, OGL v1.0a still looks like it's being de-authorized. As with the previous announcement, that specific term is carefully avoided, and like that announcement it states that previously published OGL v1 content will continue to be valid; however it notably doesn't mention that the OGL v1 can be used for content going forward, which is a de-authorization.

The phrase used is "Nothing will impact any content you have published under OGL 1.0a. That will always be licensed under OGL 1.0a." -- as noted, this does not make any mention of future content. If you can't publish future content under OGL 1.0a, then it has been de-authorized. The architect of the OGL, Ryan Dancey, along with WotC itself at the time, clearly indicated that the license could not be revoked or de-authorized.

While the royalty and ownership clauses were, indeed, important to OGL content creators and publishers such as myself and many others, it is also very important not to let that overshadow the main goal: the OGL v1.0a.

Per Ryan Dancey in response this announcement: "They must not. They can only stop the bleeding by making a clear and simple statement that they cannot and will not deauthorize or revoke v1.0a".


Amend At-Will
Also not mentioned is the leaked draft's ability to be amended at-will by WotC. An agreement which can be unilaterally changed in any way by one party is not an agreement, it's a blank cheque. They could simply add the royalties or ownership clauses back in at any time, or add even more onerous clauses.

All-in-all this is mainly just a rephrasing of last week's announcement addressing some of the tonal criticisms widely made about it. However, it will be interesting to see the new draft later this week. I would encourage people to take the feedback survey and clearly indicate that the OGL v1.0a must be left intact.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


log in or register to remove this ad

Whizbang Dustyboots

Gnometown Hero
Gelatinous Cube is just a large amoeba, so there goes that too. Bear with feathers, no idea if we have them in some mythology, worst case we go without them or create a hawkbear.
Disney used the gelatinous cube (to cheers from my youngest) in Onward and and Maleficent II: More Cheekbones apparently has a ravenbear.

They clearly aren't worried that they can't use either concept.
 


You can mock it all you like, but it doesn't have to be in one line like that.

:: Party finds a sword:::

Wizard says, "This is an ancient frost brand. A weapon forged with the cold of a frozen star in it." - Frost brand mentioned.

::sometime later in the movie::

Halfling Rogue: "Look out! A red dragon is diving at us using the sun as cover." - Red dragon mentioned(and yes I know the dialogue is bad, it could be better).

Bard: "Grooloo, use Otiluke's Resilient Sphere! It will help us." - Otiluke's Resilient Sphere mentioned.

Wizard: "Great idea. Sing us a countercharm to aid us against the dragon fear. We got this!" - Countercharm and dragon fear mentioned.

That's still a bit exaggerated. All it takes is enough mention over the 2 hour movie of things D&D related to get you into dicey water and not all of it will sound silly when said. Though as you did above, it's easy to exaggerate things to the point of silliness.
Also not crazy far off from the Hobbit movie
 


Reynard

Legend
The SRD contains names and ideas as well. Look at the D&D movie coming out. Owlebears, Tieflings, Druids, Bards, specific spells, Gelatinous Cubes, and on and on. All of which are things governed in some way or another by the OGL and the SRD. It's not just mechanics.
The SRD contains text copyrighted by WotC that the OGL allows you to use verbatim in another product. That's it. That is all it does.

You can make a movie with weird owl-bear hybrids, demon blooded warlocks, nature priests, and magic minstrels already and WotC can't say a thing about it.

What you are asserting here has no basis in how intellectual property works.
 



mamba

Legend
I'm saying that individually you are correct with those items. Too many of those items together leaves that realm and enters into D&D copyrighted territory.
well, most of these are just generic (bard, druid, demon-like). And if having a feathered bear in it makes it D&D in the eyes of WotC, then they are even crazier than I thought
 


Remove ads

Remove ads

Top