WotC OGL 1.1 leaks.
(archive.ph)
Comments (30)
sorted by:
I'm pretty sure that once you grant a perpetual license it cannot be revoked. Perpetual does mean "forever" after all. My suspicion is if they tried shut down competitors using material under the original license a court would say that the revised license only extends to WOTC content introduced after it went into effect.
Yep. The argument would be that no OGL versions are authorized anymore. (Except the poison pill 1.1 version.) Backed by Hasbro's lawyers.
I want to see them lose the court battle to put the genie back into the bottle.
It will be a thing of legend.
I wonder how much of this is driven by Pathfinder 2E doing better than them? I mean, I did hear the news about Paizo adding a bio-essentialism errata like Tasha's Cauldron of Everything did, but I can just tell anyone who wants that errata used to go screw themselves, hopefully enough.
Speaking of, is Paizo going to get caught in this mess if this goes ahead?
Honestly, I think wokeness in companies is frequently comorbid with scummy business practices like this one, now that I think about it.
PF2E is not doing better than 5E/WotC.
Legally speaking, perpetual does not mean irrevocable, it only means it does not expire. It is possible to have things irrevocable in a contract or license, but it has to be specifically called out in the text.
That said, it's still shaky ground. Courts look unkindly towards obvious bad faith. For example, Wizards themselves on Q&As have very strongly implied it would never be revoked. While the text of a contract is what matters, lying or misleading others is obvious bad faith. Especially 20 years later after allowing derivative works to thrive.
In any case, the courts have already ruled that game mechanisms cannot be copyrighted or trademarked. Creators who want to make stuff explicitly to be compatible with D&D (or any other game) cannot be stopped unless they use actual trademarks like names of things that aren't in the dictionary or public domain. If the court hears a case AND rules against WotC, it would be an absolute disaster for them, as the OGL will become completely irrelevant, poison pills or not, and One D&D will be cloned in real time with impunity.
I hope WotC is arrogant enough to sue a small-potatoes creator who successfully crowdfunds a legal defense and makes this dream come true.
Of note in the leaked language for OGL 1.1:
Arch is covering it, but I first heard about it here.
If they follow the path of other companies in the same situation, they'll issue an apology, say they didn't really mean it, then put back in 90% of the same meaning on the next version once the press gets tired of covering it.
This is it. They want that CR money after the success of the show on Amazon Prime. Hell, I bet planning for this started way back when those Twich monetary leaks happened showing they were #1 in earnings.
lol all these fake geeks and johnny come latelys complaining about this.
you're the reason this is happening. suffer.
Archived article by Gizmodo on the OGL 1.1 leaks.
WotC is looking to argue that this is the only active OGL; that the OGL 1.0 and OGL 1.0(a), will retroactively no longer be 'authorized'. The argument is based on the language in 1.0(a) citing other 'authorization,' meaning that provided by the 1.0; the legal construction of withdrawing authorization is suspect. But do you really want to go to court and fight Hasbro's lawyers?
Doubtful.
Begun, the D&D bootleg era has.
Basically start using every system EXCEPT D&D. And there's plenty of free rulesets online.
Anyone up for a rousing game of Dungeons: The Dragoning 40k, 7th seas edition?
Only if I can import my Battlemace 40 million stuff into it.
That would be my understanding.
The word 'authorization' is from the 1.0 (a) version, and meant to grandfather in other OGL versions. Wizards is trying to use that as a 'kill switch' on it. You might argue that they can revoke the 1.0 (a). That would only mean that no new 5E OGL instances would be valid, because WotC is no longer on board. Wizards is announcing that it wants out, but I don't see any mechanism for 'deauthorization' at all in the OGL 1.0.
I think future development of 5E material becomes a grey zone and this casts a shadow over continued publishing of existing products for people who sign on to OGL 1.1. You might be signing onto wizard's version as part and parcel of what you sign-- so be damn sure that you're not signing away your 1.0/1.0 a rights when you bargain with WotC.
Everyone else can not sign and tell WotC to pound sand.
I don't want to go to court over it, but Paizo might given that their Pathfinder game is based on the OGL. I doubt they're going to just fold up shop.
They may be interested in the custom licenses that the article talks about, but likely only if they deem it to be less than the cost of litigating or they don't like their chances of winning.
If they do succumb to WOTC, then I think they will blow all of the goodwill they have made by providing the number one alternative to 5E, now that I think about it.
Have a OGL FAQ from 2004
Taste the irony!
LoL. They themselves said you can use an earlier version of the license at your option. This appears to be a paper tiger, tantamount to Disney sending cease and desist letters to people wearing Mickey mouse costumes at their kids birthday party.
Lol, the faggots deleted that from their website. Here's a better archive:
https://archive.is/RweDk
archive.org has a history of memory holing things that leftists find inconvenient. If this ends up in court we don't want that disappearing.
This is some Nintendo-level shit they are trying to pull. If they do go through with it, Rekita is going to have plenty of content for his channel.
Hasbro imported a microsoft exec into WotC. This has her fingerprints all over it.
Not one, but two MS execs, both with eyes toward exactly this sort of horseshit (and loot box styled monetization schemes).
TL;DR: WotC is threatening to file false DMCA's against ANYONE who ignores OGL 1.1 with pre existing content, with said new agreement containing demands to aggressively cater to the regressive left along with some controversial monetization policies.
I'd like to think the bit about paying WotC royalties is a sign of financial desperation on their part.
Architect of the original Open Gaming License, former VP of Wizard of the Coast, Ryan Dancey:
(source)
Time to go back to 3.5 and Pathfinder 1.0.
How is this different from the debacle of 4E that gave us Pathfinder? WotC being WotC.