Well, the Electronic Frontier Foundation has weighed in on the OGL1.1;

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/01/beware-gifts-dragons-how-dds-open-gaming-license-may-have-become-trap-creators

The gist? "It's a Trap!!!"

ETA: One of the money quotes;

"What Wizards of the Coast can't do is revoke the license, yet continue to hold users to the restrictions in the OGL. If they revoke it, then the people who have relied on the license are no longer under an obligation to refrain from using "Product Identity" if they do so in ways that are fair use or otherwise permitted under copyright law. And unless they are using actually copyrighted material in a way that would infringe copyright, there may be little incentive to agree to such restrictions, let alone the new restrictions and potential royalty obligations of any new version of the OGL that comes along."

Quote from: Chris24601 on January 11, 2023, 11:17:21 AM
Well, the Electronic Frontier Foundation has weighed in on the OGL1.1;

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/01/beware-gifts-dragons-how-dds-open-gaming-license-may-have-become-trap-creators

The gist? "It's a Trap!!!"

ETA: One of the money quotes;

"What Wizards of the Coast can't do is revoke the license, yet continue to hold users to the restrictions in the OGL. If they revoke it, then the people who have relied on the license are no longer under an obligation to refrain from using "Product Identity" if they do so in ways that are fair use or otherwise permitted under copyright law. And unless they are using actually copyrighted material in a way that would infringe copyright, there may be little incentive to agree to such restrictions, let alone the new restrictions and potential royalty obligations of any new version of the OGL that comes along."

Called it! An attack on an open license is an attack on all, they needed to say something because of that. Furthermore, since they ARE aware of the issue it might make it a tinny little bit easier to enlist their help on figthing WotC if needed.

Interesting the EFF is weighing in on this...the game is afoot!

Quote from: Chris24601 on January 11, 2023, 11:17:21 AM
Well, the Electronic Frontier Foundation has weighed in on the OGL1.1;

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/01/beware-gifts-dragons-how-dds-open-gaming-license-may-have-become-trap-creators

The gist? "It's a Trap!!!"

A trap you say? OGL 1(a) or 1.1? Why not both?

That was a great read. Thanks for sharing.

So just to clarify my own understanding, OGL 1(a) gave us a license to use mechanics, which can't be copyrighted anyway, in exchange for agreeing to not use fluff, a bunch of which we should have been able to use despite copyright law. A suppose the benefit was certainty that WotC would not sue you if you abided by the license. Did I get that right?

Quote from: rytrasmi on January 11, 2023, 12:54:43 PM

Quote from: Chris24601 on January 11, 2023, 11:17:21 AM
Well, the Electronic Frontier Foundation has weighed in on the OGL1.1;

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/01/beware-gifts-dragons-how-dds-open-gaming-license-may-have-become-trap-creators

The gist? "It's a Trap!!!"

A trap you say? OGL 1(a) or 1.1? Why not both?

That was a great read. Thanks for sharing.

So just to clarify my own understanding, OGL 1(a) gave us a license to use mechanics, which can't be copyrighted anyway, in exchange for agreeing to not use fluff, a bunch of which we should have been able to use despite copyright law. A suppose the benefit was certainty that WotC would not sue you if you abided by the license. Did I get that right?

Basically, yes. The real advantage of the OGL was always the assurance that you would not face unexpected legal expenses nor "cease and desist" notices in the process of creating and selling your projects. That created a stable ecosystem in which content creators felt safe knowing they could put all their focus on content and not on risk aversion because the lines were 100% clear as to what could or could not be done without triggering the corporation that was heir to "They Sue Regularly."

Just the leak of this move has blown that security to bits and, now with so many people's livelihoods on the line, third-parties basically have no choice but to dump the OGL and take some risks if they want to survive at all.

It sounds like the RPG industry has just been thrust into a cyberpunk dystopia and we are the punks wanting to take down the corporate overlord Hasbrotc.

Quote from: Chris24601 on January 11, 2023, 11:17:21 AM
Well, the Electronic Frontier Foundation has weighed in on the OGL1.1;

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/01/beware-gifts-dragons-how-dds-open-gaming-license-may-have-become-trap-creators

The gist? "It's a Trap!!!"

ETA: One of the money quotes;

"What Wizards of the Coast can't do is revoke the license, yet continue to hold users to the restrictions in the OGL. If they revoke it, then the people who have relied on the license are no longer under an obligation to refrain from using "Product Identity" if they do so in ways that are fair use or otherwise permitted under copyright law. And unless they are using actually copyrighted material in a way that would infringe copyright, there may be little incentive to agree to such restrictions, let alone the new restrictions and potential royalty obligations of any new version of the OGL that comes along."

So that would suggest that Beholders and Mind Flayers could easily be integrated, possibly just with a name change. Final Fantasy already did it with Evil Eye, the Doom Cacodemon is also pretty close. And Mind Flayers easily fit into the Chtulhu Mythos and could be sort of a mix of Deep Ones and Chthonians.

Quote from: migo on January 11, 2023, 01:57:25 PM

So that would suggest that Beholders and Mind Flayers could easily be integrated, possibly just with a name change. Final Fantasy already did it with Evil Eye, the Doom Cacodemon is also pretty close. And Mind Flayers easily fit into the Chtulhu Mythos and could be sort of a mix of Deep Ones and Chthonians.

I mean, WoW literally has floating eyeball monsters called beholders, and other floating eyeball monsters that *aren't* called Beholders but mechanically are basically Beholders. 

Wow. OK. That's really strong precedent to go and take characteristic D&D things that have spread more generically.

I'd say there's more to the OGL than the EFF is including, specifically the SRD.  Because yes, legally a person could write a RPG book with their own Magic Missile spell and not be infringing on anything.  But it's much quicker to just plop onto the OGL train and reference the SRD for Magic Missile and call it a day.  A whole lot of writers opted to do exactly that.  A lot of online play hinges on SRD data, either directly integrated into the tabletop or opened on an external website for players to refer to, because it saves time spent flipping through books or searching PDFs.  So even if the rest of the OGL can be wholly circumvented, the loss of the SRD is a hefty blow, because someone would have to go and type up hundreds of thousands of words in a legally-distinct manner to have the same degree of rules access for players that we have today.

Quote from: Valatar on January 11, 2023, 03:24:42 PM
I'd say there's more to the OGL than the EFF is including, specifically the SRD.  Because yes, legally a person could write a RPG book with their own Magic Missile spell and not be infringing on anything.  But it's much quicker to just plop onto the OGL train and reference the SRD for Magic Missile and call it a day.  A whole lot of writers opted to do exactly that.  A lot of online play hinges on SRD data, either directly integrated into the tabletop or opened on an external website for players to refer to, because it saves time spent flipping through books or searching PDFs.  So even if the rest of the OGL can be wholly circumvented, the loss of the SRD is a hefty blow, because someone would have to go and type up hundreds of thousands of words in a legally-distinct manner to have the same degree of rules access for players that we have today.

Sure, but literally only one person has to do that. Plenty of fully fledged RPGs are made from scratch by one person with no starting point. This is by comparison much, much easier.

Well look guys, the EFF has weighed in - and nothing they say changes the *real* calculus. The incredulity everyone justifiably feels is because WotC has done what everyone assumed would be a step too far.

The point the EFF is making, salient as it is, has *always* been right in front and center: WotC is threatening everyone publishing under the OGL. Even if they *can't* legally win... they can drag you into court ($$$) and effectively bleed everyone dry.

This is why I contend that while it hurts everyone in the OSR... this isn't *really* about the OSR. It's about the big money-makers in Paizo, and Critical Roll. They're actual competition for their future video-game 6e monstrosity as they're directly keeping their sheep, off the newly erected WotC ranch. Engagement in anything NOT OneDnD going forward is competition that prevents their success.

I suspect the OSR are convenient casualties in this regard. And while WotC probably won't win in court, they're betting on clearing the board of as many threats as possible by scaring them off.

I think it's stupid on their part... someone will call their bluff, I'm sure.

Quote from: Bruwulf on January 11, 2023, 02:01:45 PM

Quote from: migo on January 11, 2023, 01:57:25 PM

So that would suggest that Beholders and Mind Flayers could easily be integrated, possibly just with a name change. Final Fantasy already did it with Evil Eye, the Doom Cacodemon is also pretty close. And Mind Flayers easily fit into the Chtulhu Mythos and could be sort of a mix of Deep Ones and Chthonians.

I mean, WoW literally has floating eyeball monsters called beholders, and other floating eyeball monsters that *aren't* called Beholders but mechanically are basically Beholders.

I wonder if WotC has pushed too far, to the point that Blizzard might push back.  Unlike table top, Blizzard has the deep pockets to push back, and a strong reason to do so.

Quote from: Valatar on January 11, 2023, 03:24:42 PM
... because someone would have to go and type up hundreds of thousands of words in a legally-distinct manner to have the same degree of rules access for players that we have today.

I suspect someone at Piazo or Kobold.

Quote from: Bruwulf on January 11, 2023, 02:01:45 PM
I mean, WoW literally has floating eyeball monsters called beholders, and other floating eyeball monsters that *aren't* called Beholders but mechanically are basically Beholders.

The movie Big Trouble in Little China had a floating eyeball monster and TSR never said squat. I have heard you have to defend your IP or it falls into public usage (see Kleenex vs tissue). If a movie, and massive videogame used the floating eyeball (presumably without permission) then it might be a bit harder to go after that particular one.