This new license could absolutely negatively impact Critical role. Yes, they have a shared content with CR still controlling the IP for the Wildmount supplement, but under the terms of the OGL 1.1 WotC/Hasbro could (and would) take full use of the Taldori Reborn campaign guide without paying royalties back to the CR team
"Would"? LOL. Y'all are just in full-on scaremongering mode, and completely divorced from reality
Wizards/Hasbro is not going to piss off CR and drive them back to Pathfinder. You might have decided they're evil, but they're not stupid
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Solid points @Daraddishman - equally (if not more) concerning is that the new OGL allows WoTC/Hasbro to change the terms of the OGL with 30 days notice. A lot of people have been misled by the $750K figure, presuming that it will only affect larger publishers. While that may be somewhat true, there's nothing in the current language of the OGL 1.1 that would prevent WoTC/Hasbro from revising that figure downward once they've gotten a list of the projects people might wish to produce. They could very easily change the new threshold to $50k in February and squash the 3rd party producers entirely.
As for the legal battle, I expect it will become a Class Action suit - that's the best hope if WoTC/Hasbro continue upon this road.
The ability to change the OGL with 30 days notice is basically a poison pill for commercial 3rd party content. Any 3rd party content provider who signs that without some sort of amendment protecting their investment from that would be psychotic.
Not to mention the fact that signing the OGL 1.1 would basically be giving away the house to WotC / Hasbro since it also gives free license for WotC / Hasbro to take your content and do whatever they please with it. Even if they revoke your ability to use it. (though, I doubt that would stand up in court, as the SCOTUS has blocked ignorant one-sided clauses like that a multitude of times in the past)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Info, Inflow, Overload. Knowledge Black Hole Imminent!
I seem to recall folks saying WAIT TILL MONDAY! WOTC WILL RELEASE A STATEMENT! and it's Monday afternoon EST and all we've got is crickets so far. Most points that to my mind need to be made have already been made in the thread (the feudal era revenue terms, total ownership of IP, ability to change terms at will with 30 days notice), so I'm not really going to say anything further except that OGL 1.1 seems to have been written with the express consultation of IP / Patent Troll style lawyers.
The reputational damage has been done, and even if Wizards were to magically release a "fair" version of OGL 1.1 that "only" needs third party creators to sells their kidneys instead of all of their organs, we'd still know that the preferred option was the latter one. Folks who say "but you see, corps can be EVIL but not STUPID" - guys, the only thing a corporation has to do is maximise shareholder value legally. Clearly some lawyers and execs did the math and figured the golden goose wasn't laying enough eggs, so time Move Aggressively to Capture The Undermonetized Market.
As someone who plays in almost exclusively homebrew games with 5e core books providing the basic framework, there is really no way I can continue to support this platform or WOTC. I had a hero membership on DDB, which I have cancelled. I won't be buying anything in the future through this platform, and to be honest, I don't see myself ever returning to whatever shambling mess One D&D becomes.
The ability to change the OGL with 30 days notice is basically a poison pill for commercial 3rd party content. Any 3rd party content provider who signs that without some sort of amendment protecting their investment from that would be psychotic.
Not to mention the fact that signing the OGL 1.1 would basically be giving away the house to WotC / Hasbro since it also gives free license for WotC / Hasbro to take your content and do whatever they please with it. Even if they revoke your ability to use it. (though, I doubt that would stand up in court, as the SCOTUS has blocked ignorant one-sided clauses like that a multitude of times in the past)
Yep, you cannot run a business if your entire business could be killed off in 30 days.
I was really hoping some of the leaked 1.1 was false, but too many creators have now said it is what they got. What a complete mess.
This new license could absolutely negatively impact Critical role. Yes, they have a shared content with CR still controlling the IP for the Wildmount supplement, but under the terms of the OGL 1.1 WotC/Hasbro could (and would) take full use of the Taldori Reborn campaign guide without paying royalties back to the CR team
"Would"? LOL. Y'all are just in full-on scaremongering mode, and completely divorced from reality
Wizards/Hasbro is not going to piss off CR and drive them back to Pathfinder. You might have decided they're evil, but they're not stupid
Yes, they would. But that would require CR to actually sign the 1.1 OGL, and I know the CR is not stupid, they would never agree to those terms especially as the CR team has been taken very obvious steps to consolidate and carefully control of their own IP However, while the Wildmount campaign does state that Exandria content is controlled by CR copyright, the 1.1 OGL as written could grant WotC/Hasbro the right to use any of that content royalty free. Who do you think WotC was talking about when they mentioned that it would only impact 20 content creators? CR is clearly one of those.
I don't think that WotC/Hasbro is evil or stupid, but they will 100% attempt to collect royalties from CR and attempt to exact control over their IP under the new OGL. Why not? They have a sharing agreement with the Wildmount and Netherdeep supplements, we just don't know what the split is. My guess is that it already heavily favorable to WotC/Hasbro.
My point was not to determine the likelihood of this happening, only that it COULD and their OGL would arguably give them the power to do so. D&D has been part of the CR tagline since episode 1, I don't think that CR (or WotC/Hasbro) wants to change that. But CR will make a business decision on what is best for their brand AND which will place a hefty focus on protecting their own IP.
I seem to recall folks saying WAIT TILL MONDAY! WOTC WILL RELEASE A STATEMENT! and it's Monday afternoon EST and all we've got is crickets so far.
I'm hoping it's because WotC / Hasbro is in a state of reconsideration and of course. It takes time to draft and review revisions of a legal agreement.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Info, Inflow, Overload. Knowledge Black Hole Imminent!
What makes anyone harbor the idea the Critical Roll crew are going to be dealing with the new OGL instead of a special contract that business partners are already used to using for these things?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The mongoose blew out its candle and was asleep in bed before the room went dark." —Llanowar fable
This new license could absolutely negatively impact Critical role. Yes, they have a shared content with CR still controlling the IP for the Wildmount supplement, but under the terms of the OGL 1.1 WotC/Hasbro could (and would) take full use of the Taldori Reborn campaign guide without paying royalties back to the CR team
"Would"? LOL. Y'all are just in full-on scaremongering mode, and completely divorced from reality
Wizards/Hasbro is not going to piss off CR and drive them back to Pathfinder. You might have decided they're evil, but they're not stupid
That's the thing... evil IS stupid. I know a lot of people think that companies willing to do this sort of thing are masterful schemers working three steps ahead, but they aren't. Greed and arrogance can blind anyone, and it wouldn't be the first time a company (or government or any other group) with power decided to abuse it the moment some dumb execs or corporate lawyers decided that there was cash to be made or that they had to do so to protect the brand.
They're putting CR in a bind; agree to 1.1 and they could lose everything the moment Dumb Corporate Exec decides, or open the company to blackmail ("Use our new supplement in your campaign, Matt... be a shame if anything were to happen to your show."), or that they decide CR isn't going in the right direction. If they don't, then CR and Wizards are on a collision course, because everyone will wonder why Matt and company keep getting away with using the 1.0a OGL. And if CR jumps ship then they can't go back to Pathfinder to escape legal problems, because PF IS OGL. Or CR could make a separate agreement and tick off the fans, who are currently spitting nails at Wizards.
If you're saying that CR will only escape because of its popularity, well... that's the problem, isn't it?
Hope you have a good time exploring all the other good games out there. D&D will be here for you when you get back.
Or they will play F&F instead. Fans & Fantasy that has the exact same ruleset, but with non-WotC content.
Hi, sorry to bother you, but could you point me to this F&F please? Google isn't helping me find it.
It doesn't exist. (yet) The idea behind that is because SCOTUS has already already ruled that rule / procedures are not copyrightable. The original case was Baker v. Selden circa 1879.
So if rules are not copyrightable, then theoretical, you can copy the rules and just create original content and have a *new game*.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Info, Inflow, Overload. Knowledge Black Hole Imminent!
That's the most I've seen thus far, so I thank you for that. Realistically, I'll probably be taking a step back from all this until something gives one way or the other; this whole debacle has been distressing, no matter how you look at it.
Hope you have a good time exploring all the other good games out there. D&D will be here for you when you get back.
Or they will play F&F instead. Fans & Fantasy that has the exact same ruleset, but with non-WotC content.
Hi, sorry to bother you, but could you point me to this F&F please? Google isn't helping me find it.
It doesn't exist. (yet) The idea behind that is because SCOTUS has already already ruled that rule / procedures are not copyrightable. The original case was Baker v. Selden circa 1879.
So if rules are not copyrightable, then theoretical, you can copy the rules and just create original content and have a *new game*.
Ah. I thought you were referring to something that already exists. Well, thank you anyway.
It doesn't exist. (yet) The idea behind that is because SCOTUS has already already ruled that rule / procedures are not copyrightable. The original case was Baker v. Selden circa 1879.
So if rules are not copyrightable, then theoretical, you can copy the rules and just create original content and have a *new game*.
People greatly overestimate the ease of doing this, as well as the clarity of the division between non-copyrightable procedures and copyrightable text.
It doesn't exist. (yet) The idea behind that is because SCOTUS has already already ruled that rule / procedures are not copyrightable. The original case was Baker v. Selden circa 1879.
So if rules are not copyrightable, then theoretical, you can copy the rules and just create original content and have a *new game*.
People greatly overestimate the ease of doing this, as well as the clarity of the division between non-copyrightable procedures and copyrightable text.
100% agree. It would have to be a group effort, with a ton of legal oversite during the process.
I think it's definitely do-able, and honestly, would love to see an open sourced Linux style approach to the base D&D mechanism. Something that third party creators could use free of charge to control their IP without having to play by Hasbro's ridiculous OGL 1.1 terms.
Also, I think there would be a huge amount of momentum and support for this from the "20 companies" that will only be impacted by this.
It doesn't exist. (yet) The idea behind that is because SCOTUS has already already ruled that rule / procedures are not copyrightable. The original case was Baker v. Selden circa 1879.
So if rules are not copyrightable, then theoretical, you can copy the rules and just create original content and have a *new game*.
People greatly overestimate the ease of doing this, as well as the clarity of the division between non-copyrightable procedures and copyrightable text.
You are correct. To the layman that is very true. You would definitely need a lawyer to define which parts are usable and which are not. The general rules can be copied, but you start to get into a gray area when it comes to spells, abilities, races, etc. Some pre-date D&D and some are direct TSR/WotC creations. You must know what is what and where the lines in the dirt would be drawn. Not to mention, someone could sue you over something that isn't even near the gray line. (Hasbro has done this several times)
That said, I have ZERO doubt it can be done especially with the TTRPG community (and it's money) behind the movement. That said, I hope it doesn't come to that. D&D has a special place in my heart dating back to my childhood. I would hate for anything negative to happen to D&D as a game as I want D&D to survive providing it doesn't become the archenemy of the TTRPG world. It's on the doorstep now.
EDIT: Actually, based on the wording of the original OGL and documented conformation from Ryan Dancey. It seems like you can outright copy the SRD and start a new game providing you remove the WotC trademarks and begin adding content ala, Pathfinder. The same way CentOS copied Redhat Linux and just changed the trademarks within the system itself.
It doesn't exist. (yet) The idea behind that is because SCOTUS has already already ruled that rule / procedures are not copyrightable. The original case was Baker v. Selden circa 1879.
So if rules are not copyrightable, then theoretical, you can copy the rules and just create original content and have a *new game*.
People greatly overestimate the ease of doing this, as well as the clarity of the division between non-copyrightable procedures and copyrightable text.
This is something I’ve been curious about for a while, because I’ve played around with the idea of creating a system similar to 5e, but free of the legal/copyright baggage. But that’s obviously not as simple as just copying out the mechanics and adding new flavor text around them. There’s a reason why no one has done that; even if it’s theoretically allowed, there’s a strong sense that testing the theory would be a huge risk.
"Would"? LOL. Y'all are just in full-on scaremongering mode, and completely divorced from reality
Wizards/Hasbro is not going to piss off CR and drive them back to Pathfinder. You might have decided they're evil, but they're not stupid
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Solid points @Daraddishman - equally (if not more) concerning is that the new OGL allows WoTC/Hasbro to change the terms of the OGL with 30 days notice. A lot of people have been misled by the $750K figure, presuming that it will only affect larger publishers. While that may be somewhat true, there's nothing in the current language of the OGL 1.1 that would prevent WoTC/Hasbro from revising that figure downward once they've gotten a list of the projects people might wish to produce. They could very easily change the new threshold to $50k in February and squash the 3rd party producers entirely.
As for the legal battle, I expect it will become a Class Action suit - that's the best hope if WoTC/Hasbro continue upon this road.
#OpenDND - opendnd.games
The ability to change the OGL with 30 days notice is basically a poison pill for commercial 3rd party content. Any 3rd party content provider who signs that without some sort of amendment protecting their investment from that would be psychotic.
Not to mention the fact that signing the OGL 1.1 would basically be giving away the house to WotC / Hasbro since it also gives free license for WotC / Hasbro to take your content and do whatever they please with it. Even if they revoke your ability to use it. (though, I doubt that would stand up in court, as the SCOTUS has blocked ignorant one-sided clauses like that a multitude of times in the past)
Info, Inflow, Overload. Knowledge Black Hole Imminent!
I seem to recall folks saying WAIT TILL MONDAY! WOTC WILL RELEASE A STATEMENT! and it's Monday afternoon EST and all we've got is crickets so far. Most points that to my mind need to be made have already been made in the thread (the feudal era revenue terms, total ownership of IP, ability to change terms at will with 30 days notice), so I'm not really going to say anything further except that OGL 1.1 seems to have been written with the express consultation of IP / Patent Troll style lawyers.
The reputational damage has been done, and even if Wizards were to magically release a "fair" version of OGL 1.1 that "only" needs third party creators to sells their kidneys instead of all of their organs, we'd still know that the preferred option was the latter one. Folks who say "but you see, corps can be EVIL but not STUPID" - guys, the only thing a corporation has to do is maximise shareholder value legally. Clearly some lawyers and execs did the math and figured the golden goose wasn't laying enough eggs, so time Move Aggressively to Capture The Undermonetized Market.
As someone who plays in almost exclusively homebrew games with 5e core books providing the basic framework, there is really no way I can continue to support this platform or WOTC. I had a hero membership on DDB, which I have cancelled. I won't be buying anything in the future through this platform, and to be honest, I don't see myself ever returning to whatever shambling mess One D&D becomes.
>> #OpenDND
Yep, you cannot run a business if your entire business could be killed off in 30 days.
I was really hoping some of the leaked 1.1 was false, but too many creators have now said it is what they got. What a complete mess.
Yes, they would. But that would require CR to actually sign the 1.1 OGL, and I know the CR is not stupid, they would never agree to those terms especially as the CR team has been taken very obvious steps to consolidate and carefully control of their own IP However, while the Wildmount campaign does state that Exandria content is controlled by CR copyright, the 1.1 OGL as written could grant WotC/Hasbro the right to use any of that content royalty free. Who do you think WotC was talking about when they mentioned that it would only impact 20 content creators? CR is clearly one of those.
I don't think that WotC/Hasbro is evil or stupid, but they will 100% attempt to collect royalties from CR and attempt to exact control over their IP under the new OGL. Why not? They have a sharing agreement with the Wildmount and Netherdeep supplements, we just don't know what the split is. My guess is that it already heavily favorable to WotC/Hasbro.
My point was not to determine the likelihood of this happening, only that it COULD and their OGL would arguably give them the power to do so. D&D has been part of the CR tagline since episode 1, I don't think that CR (or WotC/Hasbro) wants to change that. But CR will make a business decision on what is best for their brand AND which will place a hefty focus on protecting their own IP.
I'm hoping it's because WotC / Hasbro is in a state of reconsideration and of course. It takes time to draft and review revisions of a legal agreement.
Info, Inflow, Overload. Knowledge Black Hole Imminent!
What makes anyone harbor the idea the Critical Roll crew are going to be dealing with the new OGL instead of a special contract that business partners are already used to using for these things?
Hi, sorry to bother you, but could you point me to this F&F please? Google isn't helping me find it.
Also, can anyone point me to this stupid document yet? Or is it still not available to see?
check ogl.battlezoo.com
You might also consider adding your name to https://www.opendnd.games/ once you read it!
#OpenDND - opendnd.games
That's the thing... evil IS stupid. I know a lot of people think that companies willing to do this sort of thing are masterful schemers working three steps ahead, but they aren't. Greed and arrogance can blind anyone, and it wouldn't be the first time a company (or government or any other group) with power decided to abuse it the moment some dumb execs or corporate lawyers decided that there was cash to be made or that they had to do so to protect the brand.
They're putting CR in a bind; agree to 1.1 and they could lose everything the moment Dumb Corporate Exec decides, or open the company to blackmail ("Use our new supplement in your campaign, Matt... be a shame if anything were to happen to your show."), or that they decide CR isn't going in the right direction. If they don't, then CR and Wizards are on a collision course, because everyone will wonder why Matt and company keep getting away with using the 1.0a OGL. And if CR jumps ship then they can't go back to Pathfinder to escape legal problems, because PF IS OGL. Or CR could make a separate agreement and tick off the fans, who are currently spitting nails at Wizards.
If you're saying that CR will only escape because of its popularity, well... that's the problem, isn't it?
It doesn't exist. (yet) The idea behind that is because SCOTUS has already already ruled that rule / procedures are not copyrightable. The original case was Baker v. Selden circa 1879.
So if rules are not copyrightable, then theoretical, you can copy the rules and just create original content and have a *new game*.
Info, Inflow, Overload. Knowledge Black Hole Imminent!
That's the most I've seen thus far, so I thank you for that. Realistically, I'll probably be taking a step back from all this until something gives one way or the other; this whole debacle has been distressing, no matter how you look at it.
Ah. I thought you were referring to something that already exists. Well, thank you anyway.
People greatly overestimate the ease of doing this, as well as the clarity of the division between non-copyrightable procedures and copyrightable text.
100% agree. It would have to be a group effort, with a ton of legal oversite during the process.
I think it's definitely do-able, and honestly, would love to see an open sourced Linux style approach to the base D&D mechanism. Something that third party creators could use free of charge to control their IP without having to play by Hasbro's ridiculous OGL 1.1 terms.
Also, I think there would be a huge amount of momentum and support for this from the "20 companies" that will only be impacted by this.
You are correct. To the layman that is very true. You would definitely need a lawyer to define which parts are usable and which are not. The general rules can be copied, but you start to get into a gray area when it comes to spells, abilities, races, etc. Some pre-date D&D and some are direct TSR/WotC creations. You must know what is what and where the lines in the dirt would be drawn. Not to mention, someone could sue you over something that isn't even near the gray line. (Hasbro has done this several times)
That said, I have ZERO doubt it can be done especially with the TTRPG community (and it's money) behind the movement. That said, I hope it doesn't come to that. D&D has a special place in my heart dating back to my childhood. I would hate for anything negative to happen to D&D as a game as I want D&D to survive providing it doesn't become the archenemy of the TTRPG world. It's on the doorstep now.
EDIT: Actually, based on the wording of the original OGL and documented conformation from Ryan Dancey. It seems like you can outright copy the SRD and start a new game providing you remove the WotC trademarks and begin adding content ala, Pathfinder. The same way CentOS copied Redhat Linux and just changed the trademarks within the system itself.
Info, Inflow, Overload. Knowledge Black Hole Imminent!
This is something I’ve been curious about for a while, because I’ve played around with the idea of creating a system similar to 5e, but free of the legal/copyright baggage. But that’s obviously not as simple as just copying out the mechanics and adding new flavor text around them. There’s a reason why no one has done that; even if it’s theoretically allowed, there’s a strong sense that testing the theory would be a huge risk.
I will not financially support Wizards of the Coast if they attempt to revoke any previous OGL. #opendnd