WotC Unveils Draft of New Open Gaming License

As promised earlier this week, WotC has posted the draft OGL v.1.2 license for the community to see.

A survey will be going live tomorrow for feedback.

Starting the OGL ‘Playtest’

In this article, you can review a draft of OGL 1.2, submit feedback via survey, and learn about a Creative Commons license that puts D&D's core mech...

www.dndbeyond.com

The current iteration contains clauses which prohibit offensive content, applies only to TTRPG books and PDFs, no right of ownership going to WotC, and an optional creator content badge for your products.

One important element, the ability for WotC to change the license at-will has also been addressed, allowing the only two specific changes they can make -- how you cite WotC in your work, and contact details.

This license will be irrevocable.

The OGL v1.0a is still being 'de-authorized'.

 

[DungeonHack]

Which CC version? -SA? -NC?

CC BY 4.0.

 

[Nikosandros]

Also, it seems that only the latest SRD is released. The 3rd edition one is out.

 

[eyeheartawk]

Also, it seems that only the latest SRD is released. The 3rd edition one is out.

Oh that's big, good catch.

Virtually all of the OSR relies on OGL 1.0a for the 3.5 SRD.

Why not include the 3E SRD in this I wonder?

 

[overgeeked]

They're still "de-authorizing" the OGL 1.0a and still lying about it being necessary to fight discrimination.

 

[jerryrice4949]

This bit:

• Deauthorizing OGL 1.0a. We know this is a big concern. The Creative Commons license and the open terms of 1.2 are intended to help with that. One key reason why we have to deauthorize: We can't use the protective options in 1.2 if someone can just choose to publish harmful, discriminatory, or illegal content under 1.0a. And again, any content you have already published under OGL 1.0a will still always be licensed under OGL 1.0a.

Looking at you NuTSR.

 

[Nikosandros]

Uh ... probably not, based on this. Little reward, lots of risk, for someone to not take it.

Mechanics are CC, "product identity" is 1.2 ... seems about right. And if you don't like it (Paizo, et al.) you can do your own thing with ORC.

There's a lot of OSR stuff (and also PF1) which uses the old SRD.

 

[Haplo781]

Deauthorizing OGL 1.0a. We know this is a big concern. The Creative Commons license and the open terms of 1.2 are intended to help with that. One key reason why we have to deauthorize: We can't use the protective options in 1.2 if someone can just choose to publish harmful, discriminatory, or illegal content under 1.0a. And again, any content you have already published under OGL 1.0a will still always be licensed under OGL 1.0a.

Welp there you go. Still trying to justify their naughty word.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Oh, gee. That's awesome. You can't copyright the core mechanics anyway. So...thanks for nothing.

For the love of....


This is not true. It's entirely more complex than this, as every IP lawyer says. Along with actual precedence of historical lawsuits. I really, really wish people would stop making this claim.

It basically comes down an individual judge deciding if the presentation of the mechanics falls under derivative or creative works.

 

[Matt Thomason]

OGL 1.1!
No, wait, it's going to be OGL 2.0!
No, wait, OGL 1.2!

Most notably:

While the open licensing of their mechanics and various clarifications are welcome, the big worry here is still the "de-authorization" of 1.0a. In fact, stating this while also stating existing content licensed under 1.0a remains licensed under that doesn't actually make any sense. If my 1.0a content is still licensed under 1.0a, that includes my right to continue to sublicense it under 1.0a. Or to put it another way, I can still continue to authorize 1.0a for my sublicensing. So do they just mean de-authorizing only for future licensees directly from them (which does make sense)? - this isn't clear. Now, given that my product can actually be a full copy of the SRD, verbatim, it remaining licensed also comes with my ability (no, actually my obligation) to continue to offer sublicenses under 1.0a.

 

[Scribe]

Is this the 5.1 SRD they reference?

https://media.wizards.com/2016/downloads/DND/SRD-OGL_V5.1.pdf