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

The OGL hasn’t needed any language to prevent that for the past 20 years, why is it suddenly so important now? This is a concern WotC invented to justify their anti-competitive attempt to de-authorize the OGL.

I think this as well. Any bigoted products released under the OGL are not associated with Dungeons and Dragons as making clear associations with the D&D trademark isn't permitted under the OGL. Driving people out of the OGL, on the other hand increases the likelihood of directly connecting the D&D trademark with some sort of offensive material as relying solely upon copyright and patent law gives a lot more freedom to reference trademarks than does the OGL. The brand is better protected within the OGL community than without.

joe b.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


EzekielRaiden

Follower of the Way
Isn't that the plot of The Producers?

And the (alleged) existence of Uwe Boll?
No, or at least not to my knowledge.

The Producers is about committing fraud; the titular producers are insincere about wanting bad PR, not earnest. They are not trying to make a musical that performs well in the box office.

Conversely, Uwe Boll is (or at least appears to be) completely earnest, he's just stupid. He even sued his production company, claiming they were responsible for his films' poor performance. Everything I've seen indicates he genuinely believes his work has artistic merit and that it's just everyone else that is the problem.
Given they explicitly listened to feed back and showed the work, I don't agree.
[citation needed]
 


aco175

Legend
Sooo, how many people are going to sign up for DDBeyond to respond to the changes when they open things for discussion? Seems like once their numbers jump by the new subscriptions, they will think all is well.
 


Jer

Legend
Supporter
Too much misinformation is being spread around. I hope everything is resolved on Friday, and the community calms down.
I hope that they come out and unequivocally state "We are not revoking the OGL 1.0a - everything that is currently under it - including both the 3.x SRD and the 5.x SRD - remains licensed in perpetuity forever as was the original intent of the license and we have wording from our legal team that documents that in a legally binding manner so that nobody has any concerns about it going forward. All new content will be released on our new OGL 1.1 that we are working on and we'll have more to say about that as we develop it. We also have plans for some special licenses that we'd like to offer partners that allow them more than what either the OGL 1.0a or 1.1 will for those who would like to sign on to them."

That's all they need to do. That's it. It's just that simple. Even just that first sentence (and of course following through on it) would defuse the situation entirely - the rest of it is just altering their plans for their new OGL in a manner that doesn't involve going back on the legal commitment they made over two decades ago and that 3pp folks have just assumed was true all along.
 


Vaalingrade

Legend
No, or at least not to my knowledge.

The Producers is about committing fraud; the titular producers are insincere about wanting bad PR, not earnest. They are not trying to make a musical that performs well in the box office.
Wait... but that's bad PR, right? They changed the whole musical to generate bad PR and make it flop.
 

Sooo, how many people are going to sign up for DDBeyond to respond to the changes when they open things for discussion? Seems like once their numbers jump by the new subscriptions, they will think all is well.
People making accounts on Beyond does not equal Subscriptions. Beyond Accounts are free.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top