We are excited to announce that D&D Beyond will soon be joining Hasbro as part of the Wizards of the Coast family!
On May 18, 2022 or soon after, your D&D Beyond account will transfer to Wizards of the Coast, at which point (and going forward) the Wizards Terms of Use will apply to your use of D&D Beyond, and the Wizards Privacy Policy will apply to the personal data associated with your account. If you are located in the European Economic Area or the United Kingdom, Wizards of the Coast LLC will become the “data controller” of your personal data once it transfers.
For more information on this transaction, please click here. If you wish to delete your account prior to the transfer, you will find instructions for doing so here.
Frequently asked questions
When will the D&D Beyond Terms of Service be updated?
The Terms of Service will be updated to Wizards of the Coast Terms of Service on or around May 18, 2022.
Why are they being updated?
As part of Wizards of the Coast acquiring D&D Beyond, we will extend the Wizards Terms of Service to cover this new service.
What is changing in them?
We need your permission to put your user content on D&D Beyond and operate the D&D Beyond service, and we’re working to ensure that the scope of the permission you give us is tailored to that goal. The Wizards Terms of Service will therefore be updated with a section specific to D&D Beyond to allow us to host your content and otherwise operate the D&D Beyond service.
Will Wizards own my homebrew content created on D&D Beyond?
Wizards has no intent of taking ownership over user content you put on D&D Beyond, and the Terms of Service will not grant us such rights. The permissions we will need for user content will relate to allowing us to operate the D&D Beyond service, including displaying that content on our site.
Do these changes affect homebrew content that was created before May 18?
Any content that remains on the D&D Beyond service will be subject to the updated Wizards Terms of Service. The updated Terms of Service should not impact how you've used the site or owned your content prior to May 18.
If I delete my D&D Beyond account, will my homebrew content remain on D&D Beyond? If so, will my username still be credited?
While your homebrew content will remain on D&D Beyond, the credited username will change to “user-[number].”
Will Wizards own any character or account information I upload (e.g. character sheets, profile pictures)?
Wizards has no intent of taking ownership over user content you put on D&D Beyond, and the Terms of Service will not grant us such rights. The permissions we will need for that content will relate to allowing us to operate the D&D Beyond service, including displaying that content on our site.
Will I need a Wizards account to access or sign up for D&D Beyond after May 18?
No. You can continue to use your Twitch or Google account or Apple ID to sign into D&D Beyond. New users will still need a Twitch or Google account or Apple ID to sign up for D&D Beyond after May 18.
This is going circular. Again, I already knew DnDBeyond's ToS. Its why I haven't done far more content here in fact, and why so many use other sites like GM Binder, Patron, DMsGuild and so on. I just knew they couldn't easily use member produced content in real life practice, given how limited they were in using non WotC-approved material. That wall breaks down with this shift and is the turning point for me leaving for better options. I'll only use this site for the books I own here, nothing more, when it could have been so much more, that other sites and games have proved works well on a commercial scale with incredible profits and fun for all.
But here's the thing, most users are not legally inclined to read ToSs, nor understand much of it in real life practice even if they did. Unless one is a law student, people just get caught in an invisible net of owning other people's produced content. And right now, here, is a great place to show that it happens, and how it is more of an issue in practice now that WotC themselves own it.
If you want a more in-dept discussion about it, copyright laws are a good starting point to how laws like ToSs work in practice. I'd rather not get into it here personally.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_7jLI1qO4Q
Minecraft has language in their agreement that gives the owners of the game an irrevocable license over any Minecraft mods you make. Bethesda has similar language in their Creation Kit mods and any mods used in ESO.
Given that fact, your very examples prove the opposite of your point - you already have admitted that those games are thriving, which means they are thriving in spite of this language that you seem so terrified of.
The simple reality is that you agree to this kind of language pretty much anytime you agree to a T&C on the internet. It hasn’t hampered any other extremely successful endeavour; it’s not going to hamper Wizards.
Yes, it fact, I actually do think they are thriving in spite of their legal limitations. Though, in those cases, its more of a give-and-take, rather than the ham-fisting of something like Super Smash Bros Melee's tournament scene. In Minecraft's case, Java gives a far more widespread appeal to mod-makers compared to the Bedrock's corporate safety, but even then, much like DMsGuild, there is still some give, rather than the take-all of this ToS. Skyrim also had far more freedom of mods before it was turned to be more regulated, so their Creation Club shop would be more competitive and standardized. It is just more underground and/or to the side, rather than by legal environments that allow it to show straight up on the game's own platforms.
When I talk creator content, I'm more focused on positive and friendly presentation of it, be it legally or practically. For example the original Warcraft 3 and Starcraft mods that spawned DOTA, Half-Life spawning Counter-strike, Halo 3 's Forge producing all types of game modes. If that type of stuff was on here instead of needing to be on other platforms, D&D would prosper incredibly on both ends. These legal bindings hamper that prosperity. WotC wouldn't even let them use LoL's Bilgewater simply because they are very threatened by any competition at all, rather than embracing it as a way to connect and produce far more innovative potential that they could be at the forefront of.
Wizards is not going to take a position that is adverse to their own interest, different from the industry norm, and different from the T&C of the site as they already exist, simply because your gut says that this “stifles development”, so you might want to find some better evidence than things which either run contrary to your point or are not analogous to the present situation.
Nor can they even host your fan content without this license language, since they wouldn’t have a right to post your content on their site.
With no real evidence that this stifles user experience to the point it would be a problem, of course they will choose the option that protects them in the situation where an employee might read user-submitted content, forget they read it, and inadvertently copy that item thinking it was their own creation in future content. That kind of thing happens all the time in development, which is why these kinds of terms exist.
As for your Runeterra example, I know lots of people tried to say “Wizards is afraid of competition so they axed it”, but the much more obvious explanation is that the partnership between Riot and Beyond did not really have all its legal ducks properly lined up, and Wizards didn’t want to find itself on the wrong side of a copyright dispute.
Also, just as an aside, I was rather amused at your “Unless one is a law student, people just get caught in an invisible net of owning other people's produced content” comment. There is probably no one less qualified to read or interpret legalese than a law student, except perhaps a first year associate. There’s a reason law firms loose money on their associates for the first year or so - they basically have to be taught how the law actually works, rather than the academic, philosophic view of law taught in law school.
In you account you can already merge your WotC account, so I am hoping for it to be a login option as well.
For those of us who actually put a lot of work into their creations and do it by the book and have hopes for doing more in this industry, this policy change blatantly seems like they are gunning for anyone who uses their site, and aiming to steal their work. It even says they can do it all with NO OBLIGATION TO THE USER. So they can take my hard work, and just repackage it, and sell my monsters, or my magic items. Screw that, I'm going back to pen an paper initiative, their Combat tracker sucks anyway.
This seems blatantly unfriendly and against basically what dnd is.
As has been discussed on this thread before, this is not a policy change. It is the same policy that existed under Fandom… and the same policy that exists on every single website you use that involves user-submitted content.
definitely not liking the direction of Hasbro's terms & privacy, but at this point it seems a done deal.
This, exactly. There was a little mini scandal about this when Beyond first launched and the answer was the same. They can't share your character sheet with other people in your campaign online if they don't have the copyrights to it. duh. I'm not the biggest cheerleader for WotC, but the idea that they're going to data mine thousands of amateur accounts hoping to get good ideas for their publications is...silly.
So many people crying about the ToS, wheras I'm holding onto hope that whatever changes might happen from this acquisition extends to them actually removing bugs that have been in the character builder for years now (hello, HP level up glitch), and actually releasing new content into the builder and other tools when new material drops instead of waiting, and waiting and oh look we're still waiting on some books that've been out to be fully introduced into the digital tools. I like the free articles, I like how easy the character builder makes things for newbies, but I never saw a reason to drop money or care about a site that wanted to release more digital dice and character sheet themes than fix fundamental flaws that frankly has been done better already for free by other websites.
Also, no one cares about any of your homebrew, for people afraid of rights theft. You probably weren't worth stealing from before, and I doubt you will be now. Sorry, harsh truths, but no one forced you to use the site in the first place and if a different company doing the same thing as the old one does in the first place, you're literally honking at something that isn't even there. Some of you people are just ridiculous and exactly what needs to be avoided in the hobby so please, by all means, cancel your accounts if you feel slighted. You will not be missed. :)
%100. This is a "We need to cover our butts" not "We're gonna steal so much content!"
The other major scenario is that someone makes homebrew on the site that coincidently (or based on leaks) reflects un-released content, those users can't sue them.
WOTC could steal all of your content, but THAT would lead to massive cancellations... and a LOT of other issues for a company that employs freelance/contract artists, content creators, and writers. That well would quickly dry up if there were repeated, credible allegations of such a practice.
Not being legally inclined to read the ToS does not make one exempt or immune to it.
Honestly, you're right, the conversation is going in circles. because this is a matter of users complaining about rights to their derivative work they either already gave up in the first place by agreeing to use and using the site's homebrew, encounter, and stat block tools, or are misunderstanding the purpose of having to agree to the data controller having the right to use assets you create/use on site.
If you have characters, creatures, items, settings and backgrounds that you plan on publishing, publish them before putting them here. WotC doesn't get ownership of your OCs/characters/settings just because you uploaded them here. but they can feature them in videos highlighting the site, or make content based on or similar to it. and if you based your content on third party IPs and that third party cries foul, and on you not WotC. and they'll likely send them directly your way. especially if you've been attempting to profit from it.
Maybe that's the crux of the scare here. because this only seems to affect creators who have vested interest in using the tools to essentially publish third party content ala the 3.5 days. Yeah I'm pretty sure Wizards won't let that fly here on beyond if they can't get their finger in the pie. but that's to be expected. probably gonna need to look for an alternative if that's the only worth the site had to you.
License is the correct spelling. Licence is the British spelling.
To allay your concerns, these kinds of clauses are typically just to avoid any "they stole my idea" hassle. Because if they come up with an idea that is even vaguely reminiscent to one a community member came up with, some pretty baseless accusations can (and likely will) be made.
I don't care about TOS, but recently the quality of the website on mobile dropped considerably and is very buggy and annoying.
Is the app going to be on the WoTC website? Or will it stay the way it is right now just switch ownership?
This cannot be stated enough. It's a clause included in any service that accommodates user created content. I've seen numerous game develops get accused of 'stealing' content from modders, when it's actually a feature that was in development for months, and happened to be released a few days after the mod is published.
This entire debate about who owns what content and "I used to own the (content), now it's just a licence?" discussion occurs every time digital property changes hands, and shows that most people either don't read or don't understand the ToS of whatever they may be using. If you don't read the ToS, that doesn't make you exempt from them, and "But they didn't tell me." is not a valid argument. Read your ToS! If you don't understand them, have them clarified, don't just nod along and hope it doesn't screw you later. I've heard people argue that agreeing with ToS is mandatory. It's only mandatory if you want to use the service provided. If you do not agree with the ToS, then don't use the service. Digital account? Delete (or refuse to make) your account. Physical product? Put it back in the box, and see what options your retailer has for returning the un-used product.
Final point: Most (not all, I said "Most") Terms of Service don't exist to screw over users. They usually exist to prevent being screwed over by users. Intentionally screwing over users is one of the dumbest things a service provider, because they can't make money if all their customers jump ship. If they don't include many of the generic clauses they do, there are plenty of people willing to exploit them, either by suing for a generous payout, or reselling content they shouldn't have the right to sell.
Is there any chance we can stop beating this dead horse, and discuss other things about this merge? Hypothetical changes to the D&D Beyond itself perhaps? I'd love to see support for other editions of D&D, for example. Will we see promotions for other WoTC platforms appear? There seems to be no new information to be added to the legal drama debate at this point.
Easy answer, it won’t. Slightly longer answer:
1. This is the exact same rules that already existed, so anything you could do previously you can still do.
2. A license isn’t ownership; Wizards can use your content, but they don’t own it. So, unless you are trying to sell lithographs of the character sheet itself or anything else specifically delineated as being Wizards’ property, you still own your own IP.
Right now I have a free subscription and I bought my books through DnDbeyond. Will the service stay the same or will I have to pay a monthly fee to use my books?