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

FormerLurker

Adventurer
we added what demands? Last I checked most are demanding they simply stick to the contract they agreed to stick to, hardly a demand, more something that is usually taken for granted
Read other posters in this thread and related threads. There are LOTs with demands.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
Probably this:

The old OGL lets people theoretically make D&D content that isn't just PDFs and WotC wants to limit that and crack down on non-PDFs.

A OGL 2.0 that is functionally identical to the OGL 1.0a but limited to PDFs is an example of a compromise, letting 3PP continue doing what they're doing but preventing video game companies and the like from making D&D video games and using too much D&D IP for non-D&D RPG products.
Unless they just lied to us, then print and social media are also fine with them.
 
Last edited:

Minigiant

Legend
Supporter
Just because Paizo is the biggest fish we as TTRPG fans can see that challenges D&D doesn't mean they're the biggest fish WotC sees challenging D&D. They have a very different perspective.

Is WOTC afraid of another Megacorp buying and funding a 3pp that produces a D&D-like game?
 





TrainedMunkee

Explorer
So far, these "fans" have been moreorless "tolerated" as part of a Fan Policy.

However.

Hasbro-WotC is in process to do something big and anti-OGL in order to dominate the digital environment of D&D and all RPG gaming generally.

What Hasbo-WotC is planning, will also affect the video content creators, especially the ones like Critical Role that earn significant money.

Moreover, most livestreamers are also homebrewers who invent new settings, and sometimes new character options. Hasbro-WotC would explicitly target these monetized product creators.

From their hiring practices it's fairly obvious what direction they are planning on going.
 


TrainedMunkee

Explorer
Larger companies and major brands starting to make D&D and RPG products and using their IP.

They don't care if smaller companies play in their sandbox. But as D&D becomes a bigger brand and a household name, with movies and a TV show, they're likely worried about other companies that are bigger than WotC playing with their toys. If the D&D TV show is a hit, they don't want Prime or Disney+ making a competing show and related game.

Amazon and Disney would eat them as a snack, so I doubt it.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top