• 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 Walks Back Some OGL Changes, But Not All

Wizards of the Coast has finally made a statement regarding the OGL. The statement says that the leaked version was a draft designed to solicit feedback and that they are walking back some problematic elements, but don't address others--most notably that the current OGL v1.0a is still being deauthorized. Non-TTRPG mediums such as "educational and charitable campaigns, livestreams, cosplay...

Wizards of the Coast has finally made a statement regarding the OGL. The statement says that the leaked version was a draft designed to solicit feedback and that they are walking back some problematic elements, but don't address others--most notably that the current OGL v1.0a is still being deauthorized.
  • Non-TTRPG mediums such as "educational and charitable campaigns, livestreams, cosplay, VTT-uses" are unaffected by the new license.
  • The 'we can use your content for any reason' provision is going away
  • The royalties aspect is also being removed
  • Content previously released under OGL v1.0a can still be sold, but the statement on that is very short and seems to imply that new content must still use OGL v1.1. This is still a 'de-authorization' of the current OGL.
  • They don't mention the 'reporting revenue' aspect, or the 'we can change this in any way at 30 days notice' provision; of course nobody can sign a contract which can be unilaterally changed by one party.
  • There's still no mention of the 'share-a-like' aspect which defines an 'open' license.
The statement can be read below. While it does roll back some elements, the fact remains that the OGL v1.0a is still being de-authorized.

D&D historian Benn Riggs (author of Slaying the Dragon) made some comments on WotC's declared intentions -- "This is a radical change of the original intention of the OGL. The point of the OGL was to get companies to stop making their own games and start making products for D&D. WoTC execs spent a ton of time convincing companies like White Wolf to make OGL products."

Linda Codega on Gizmodo said "For all intents and purposes, the OGL 1.1 that was leaked to the press was supposed to go forward. Wizards has realized that they made a mistake and they are walking back numerous parts of the leaked OGL 1.1..."

Ryan Dancey, architect of the original OGL commented "They made an announcement today that they're altering their trajectory based on pressure from the community. This is still not what we want. We want Hasbro to agree not to ever attempt to deauthorize v1.0a of the #OGL. Your voices are being heard, and they matter. We're providing visible encouragement and support to everyone inside Wizards of the Coast fighting for v1.0a. It matters. Knowing we're here for them matters. Keep fighting!"


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

When we initially conceived of revising the OGL, it was with three major goals in mind. First, we wanted the ability to prevent the use of D&D content from being included in hateful and discriminatory products. Second, we wanted to address those attempting to use D&D in web3, blockchain games, and NFTs by making clear that OGL content is limited to tabletop roleplaying content like campaigns, modules, and supplements. And third, we wanted to ensure that the OGL is for the content creator, the homebrewer, the aspiring designer, our players, and the community—not major corporations to use for their own commercial and promotional purpose.

Driving these goals were two simple principles: (1) Our job is to be good stewards of the game, and (2) the OGL exists for the benefit of the fans. Nothing about those principles has wavered for a second.

That was why our early drafts of the new OGL included the provisions they did. That draft language was provided to content creators and publishers so their feedback could be considered before anything was finalized. In addition to language allowing us to address discriminatory and hateful conduct and clarifying what types of products the OGL covers, our drafts included royalty language designed to apply to large corporations attempting to use OGL content. It was never our intent to impact the vast majority of the community.

However, it’s clear from the reaction that we rolled a 1. It has become clear that it is no longer possible to fully achieve all three goals while still staying true to our principles. So, here is what we are doing.

The next OGL will contain the provisions that allow us to protect and cultivate the inclusive environment we are trying to build and specify that it covers only content for TTRPGs. That means that other expressions, such as educational and charitable campaigns, livestreams, cosplay, VTT-uses, etc., will remain unaffected by any OGL update. Content already released under 1.0a will also remain unaffected.

What it will not contain is any royalty structure. It also will not include the license back provision that some people were afraid was a means for us to steal work. That thought never crossed our minds. Under any new OGL, you will own the content you create. We won’t. Any language we put down will be crystal clear and unequivocal on that point. The license back language was intended to protect us and our partners from creators who incorrectly allege that we steal their work simply because of coincidental similarities . As we continue to invest in the game that we love and move forward with partnerships in film, television, and digital games, that risk is simply too great to ignore. The new OGL will contain provisions to address that risk, but we will do it without a license back and without suggesting we have rights to the content you create. Your ideas and imagination are what makes this game special, and that belongs to you.

A couple of last thoughts. First, we won’t be able to release the new OGL today, because we need to make sure we get it right, but it is coming. Second, you’re going to hear people say that they won, and we lost because making your voices heard forced us to change our plans. Those people will only be half right. They won—and so did we.

Our plan was always to solicit the input of our community before any update to the OGL; the drafts you’ve seen were attempting to do just that. We want to always delight fans and create experiences together that everyone loves. We realize we did not do that this time and we are sorry for that. Our goal was to get exactly the type of feedback on which provisions worked and which did not–which we ultimately got from you. Any change this major could only have been done well if we were willing to take that feedback, no matter how it was provided–so we are. Thank you for caring enough to let us know what works and what doesn’t, what you need and what scares you. Without knowing that, we can’t do our part to make the new OGL match our principles. Finally, we’d appreciate the chance to make this right. We love D&D’s devoted players and the creators who take them on so many incredible adventures. We won’t let you down.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Micah Sweet

Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
so you see we just have a disagreement here... nothing you say after this is going to make me say "Gee I guess I don't want hate speech and slurs cut out" so why are we going to do this?
You don't want guidelines. I want them.

SUre they can.

Lets pretend I owned the MCU... and I decide I want people to be able to put out fan fic as Open Licenenced things... but I have rules you have to follow... you can't copy names of story lines from the comics or other movies, and you can't change heroes to villains

Even BETTER, lets say I owned D&D in 2000 and I said "Hey I want to try this open game thingy but I want to make sure they can't produce new feats... so the open licences says you can agree to it and you can make your own races classes spells monsters and settings, but no feats.

better yet, lets say I just don't want anyone to make racists content, and I recognize that in 2000 what we consider racists was way different then in 1976 when this game started... so in 2024 it might be different again, so I leave vauge rules that will allow each generation of gamers to push for what they consider racists.



if the ONLY way to be for OGL is to be OKAY with hate speech I bet you are grouping a lot of people as 'against' that would not consider thema gainst... I have always said it was both good and bad and I was never sure if it was the right move (and still am not sure) However keeping hatespeach rules in makes me happy.

and the entire idea of "You have to be 100% with us, or you are the enemy" has to stop.
They're not allowing each generation of gamers to push for anything. They already could. What they're doing to allowing themselves to make that decision, at any time, for any reason. I don't want them to have that power. They're far too powerful already.
 

log in or register to remove this ad



BrokenTwin

Biological Disaster
Seriously, stop that. Silence is not consent, nor agreement. It's waiting to see what's going on before jumping headlong into the fire. They has people They're responsible for, and they can take their doggon time.
I don't think anybody here is saying "how dare they not say anything immediately!?!", but more "I wonder what they will say when they do break their silence?" Like it or not, they're a big deal in the industry, and their words have weight. If they come down on the side of WotC, then a lot of Hasbro's bad faith acting is likely to get swept under the rug by the consumers at large.
 



Where are you getting that?

Where is that stated?

Where?


The only mention of OGL 1.0a doesn’t say that, far as I can see.

What am I missing?

(I can’t upload a picture on the terrible service I have where I am, but the line regarding the OGL 1.0a reads: “That means that other expressions, such as educational and charitable campaigns, livestreams, cosplay, VTT-uses, etc., will remain unaffected by any OGL update. Content already released under 1.0a will also remain unaffected.”

That could mean they still plan to try to disallow new content under the 1.0a license, but it does not say that.
Implied in "content already released" is the clear statement that future content will not be permitted. That is only possible with revoking 1.0a. They are just talking about not making anyone pulp existing books. They are still clearly trying to de-authorize 1.0a.
 


doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
Also…why should I be upset about the OGL 1.0a only remaining valid for already published works, if the OGL 2.0 doesn’t include the things they’ve promised to remove from it?

Like…what? No royalties, no “back licensing”, and also no Nazis. Cool.

If the 2.0 doesn’t cover past versions of D&D AND “(partially) deauthorizes” past OGLs, then they are still gonna lose my support indefinitely, but if Paizo could put out a new supplement for starfinder under 2.0, with no back license and no royalties, then…okay?
 

Prime_Evil

Adventurer
The statement still doesn't address the use of the OGL v.1.0 by games completely unrelated to D&D (e.g. FATE, Cepheus Engine, Legend, OpenD6, etc). It still sounds like WotC want to kill these games off. Sure, existing products made under v.1.0a can still be sold. But new products are impossible because WotC are effectively prohibiting the use of the licence. It may be that the terms are only binding on people who agree to the terms of v.1.1. But it still reads like WotC believe they can unilaterally revoke the use of the licence by everyone - including games completely unrelated to D&D. It is clearly anticompetitive.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top