This is the same kind of crap that Greg Stafford did in licensing for Glorantha and Runequest. He killed untold fanzines, websites, and interest over an ill-considered license. He wanted to protect his IP for possible licensing deals, but the language allowed for him to steal other people's IP and use it however he wanted. Kind of like what WOTC is proposing.

I admit, the worst case scenario here; is that WOTC is about to squash the D&D flavored portion, of the RPG hobby.  They will make a power play on the industry; and try to put the 3.0 OGL genie, back into the bottle.

The best case scenario, is that the big players in the industry decide to resist.  Or, a massive shift toward different games, could take place?

Quote from: S'mon on January 05, 2023, 11:45:30 AM
Not sure if you've seen the Gizmodo article yet, it just came out https://gizmodo.com/dnd-wizards-of-the-coast-ogl-1-1-open-gaming-license-1849950634

Basically WoTC are really shooting the puppy, it looks like.


Despite reassurances from Wizards of the Coast last month, the original OGL will become an "unauthorized" agreement, and it appears no new content will be permitted to be created under the original license.

Money quote:

The original OGL granted "perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive license" to the Open Game Content (commonly called the System Resource Document) and directed that licensees "may use any authorized version of this License to copy, modify and distribute any Open Game Content originally distributed under any version of this License." But the updated OGL says that "this agreement is...an update to the previously available OGL 1.0(a), which is no longer an authorized license agreement."

The new document clarifies further in the "Warranties" section that "this agreement governs Your use of the Licensed Content and, unless otherwise stated in this agreement, any prior agreements between Us and You are no longer in force."

According to attorneys consulted for this article, the new language may indicate that Wizards of the Coast is rendering any future use of the original OGL void, and asserting that if anyone wants to continue to use Open Game Content of any kind, they will need to abide by the terms of the updated OGL, which is a far more restrictive agreement than the original OGL.

Wizards of the Coast declined to clarify if this is in fact the case.

Never ever give them the clicks, here's an archived version:

https://archive.is/iHTxP

Quote from: Chris24601 on January 05, 2023, 12:03:09 PM

Quote from: Mithgarthr on January 05, 2023, 11:57:42 AM
Pretty good argument for them not being able to undo the old OGL:

https://batintheattic.blogspot.com/2023/01/section-9-of-open-game-license.html

Good argument. Who wants to spend the $$$ to get it in front of an actual judge is the real question.

This is where the future is decided.  How hard will WOTC push it, and will someone effectively stand up to it?  One good precedent, is what the rest of the industry needs to see.

Quote from: Chris24601 on January 05, 2023, 12:03:09 PM

Quote from: Mithgarthr on January 05, 2023, 11:57:42 AM
Pretty good argument for them not being able to undo the old OGL:

https://batintheattic.blogspot.com/2023/01/section-9-of-open-game-license.html

Good argument. Who wants to spend the $$$ to get it in front of an actual judge is the real question.

Crowdfunding is a hell of a way to counter that tactic.

So, how would the revoking of the WotC OGL 1.0 affect Mongoose Traveller and Cepheus Engine?

Both used the OGL to get started and Cepheus Engine still uses it even though it doesn't use any WotC IP except the OGL in it's products.

The best thing existing content creators can do is kick the original OGL out of new printings of their work. Stop using it.

Quote from: Jam The MF on January 05, 2023, 12:12:01 PM
This is where the future is decided.  How hard will WOTC push it, and will someone effectively stand up to it?  One good precedent, is what the rest of the industry needs to see.

I think it's so bad that if WoTC persist with it, they're pushing the industry into fight-or-die. AFAICT, WoTC-Hasbro would probably lose that fight. They'll certainly do a lot of damage though.

Quote from: jeff37923 on January 05, 2023, 12:18:58 PM
So, how would the revoking of the WotC OGL 1.0 affect Mongoose Traveller and Cepheus Engine?

Both used the OGL to get started and Cepheus Engine still uses it even though it doesn't use any WotC IP except the OGL in it's products.

What it would seem is that the OGL 1.0a is no longer a valid license from Wizard's perspective. So that license is cancelled and no longer valid for any use(from Wizard's perspective). They can either go with the OGL 1.1 which is the current valid license(which they can cancel at any time for any reason and steal your product if they wanna), they can go with no license which means standard copyright law applies(pretty open for RPG games, but maybe murky for what fans can and can't exactly copy) or they can create a new public use, fan friendly license and go with that for their copyrighted material.

All IMO, IANAL, etc etc.

In the alternative, members of the OGL community who are using any of WotC's SRD material (those who merely put out their own systems under the license can just drop the license... which I recommend they do ASAP) need to put their heads together on an alternate "different but close enough" SRD of raw mechanics to pull from and to which a new body of shared lore (the main appeal of the SRD was not having to reinvent the wheel on monsters... how many settings have chromatic dragons simply because the SRD let them have chromatic dragons instead of having to invent their own variety?) and "Free Systems License."

Totally self-serving I'll admit, but I've got my own non-OGL d20-based system with its own monster lore nearly ready to go (it's lacking only art and some editing passes that I put on hold after a personal loss earlier this year, but this is restoring my fighting spirit) that I was planning on have my own version of an open license for (main difference from the OGL1.0a being no section seven... I WANT people to be able to indicate compatibility because that grows name recognition for my system and, as of this clusterf***, adding "irrevocable" alongside perpetual and royalty-free to the license terms) so people could make 3rd party content. If anyone wants to get involved with doing that as an alternative, my PM box is open.

Quote from: jeff37923 on January 05, 2023, 12:18:58 PM
So, how would the revoking of the WotC OGL 1.0 affect Mongoose Traveller and Cepheus Engine?

Both used the OGL to get started and Cepheus Engine still uses it even though it doesn't use any WotC IP except the OGL in it's products.

As written, if they include the OGL in their product, WotC gets perpetual free use of their IP and can shut the current distributors down for any reason. They aren't claiming IP infringement... they are claiming the license itself is no longer a valid one, anyone using it must update the license to 1.1 and that 1.1 gives them the ability to shut down your use while enabling them to use it.

Basically, Mongoose and Cepheus need to dump the OGL from every product they produce ASAP and get a new open license agreement for them.

Quote from: Mithgarthr on January 05, 2023, 11:57:42 AM
Pretty good argument for them not being able to undo the old OGL:

https://batintheattic.blogspot.com/2023/01/section-9-of-open-game-license.html

Quote from: jeff37923 on January 05, 2023, 12:18:58 PM
So, how would the revoking of the WotC OGL 1.0 affect Mongoose Traveller and Cepheus Engine?

Both used the OGL to get started and Cepheus Engine still uses it even though it doesn't use any WotC IP except the OGL in it's products.

I'm not a lawyer, but I see that in its OGL the Cepheus Engine SRD cites both the original SRD from Wizards of the Coast and the Traveller SRD from Mongoose Publishing.

cf. https://www.orffenspace.com/cepheus-srd/legal.html

Which is odd because the Traveller SRD doesn't cite anything from WotC except the OGL itself.

https://www.traveller-srd.com/open-game-license/

If
(a) Wizards of the Coast officially says that the OGL version 1.0a is now unauthorized,
and
(b) this de-authorization is legal despite the intent argument Mithgarthr cited,

then any publications relying on the Traveller SRD would need a separate agreement from Mongoose Publishing to use that material. Without such a new agreement, they would be vulnerable to being sued by Mongoose Publishing - but such a lawsuit might be tough to win, and its not clear that Mongoose is inclined to try such a move.

Quote from: Chris24601 on January 05, 2023, 06:07:47 AM
For the cooperative minded, I'd be looking at creating a replacement for the OGL... like a Free System License (FSL) that perhaps removes/alters section 7 and adds "irrevocable" to the terms of the license and perhaps a separate OSR-based SRD that has been sufficiently rewritten/stripped of any WotC specific IP as to allow it to stand clear of Hasbro's hungry maw.

Again, not a lawyer, but I'd avoid copying verbatim any parts of the WotC OGL, since it is copyright by WotC.

One could use the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license instead. There have been a few games released under Creative Commons previously.

Quote from: jhkim on January 05, 2023, 01:03:36 PM

Quote from: Chris24601 on January 05, 2023, 06:07:47 AM
For the cooperative minded, I'd be looking at creating a replacement for the OGL... like a Free System License (FSL) that perhaps removes/alters section 7 and adds "irrevocable" to the terms of the license and perhaps a separate OSR-based SRD that has been sufficiently rewritten/stripped of any WotC specific IP as to allow it to stand clear of Hasbro's hungry maw.

Again, not a lawyer, but I'd avoid copying verbatim any parts of the WotC OGL, since it is copyright by WotC.

One could use the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license instead. There have been a few games released under Creative Commons previously.

Eh, I wrote all my mechanics from scratch to be free and clear of the OGL, I'll pay a lawyer some $$ for a rewrite of the OGL1.0a with desired changes in original wording if that's what it takes to remain free and clear of them.

Quote from: Chris24601 on January 05, 2023, 01:07:09 PM

Quote from: jhkim on January 05, 2023, 01:03:36 PM

Quote from: Chris24601 on January 05, 2023, 06:07:47 AM
For the cooperative minded, I'd be looking at creating a replacement for the OGL... like a Free System License (FSL) that perhaps removes/alters section 7 and adds "irrevocable" to the terms of the license and perhaps a separate OSR-based SRD that has been sufficiently rewritten/stripped of any WotC specific IP as to allow it to stand clear of Hasbro's hungry maw.

Again, not a lawyer, but I'd avoid copying verbatim any parts of the WotC OGL, since it is copyright by WotC.

One could use the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license instead. There have been a few games released under Creative Commons previously.

Eh, I wrote all my mechanics from scratch to be free and clear of the OGL, I'll pay a lawyer some $$ for a rewrite of the OGL1.0a with desired changes in original wording if that's what it takes to remain free and clear of them.

That's possible - but why not use Creative Commons instead? It seems like reinventing the wheel to write a new license from scratch that hasn't been tested in court. Incidentally, as a resource, one can look at the legal database of Creative Commons, which has a history of dozens of court cases and legal texts related to CC and other open licenses.

https://legaldb.creativecommons.org/

someone should make a dnd-clone rpg to draw in 5e players