B. You own the new and original content You create. You agree to give Us a nonexclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, sub-licensable, royalty-free license to use that content for any purpose.
Under OGL: Commercial at around page 7
Edit: Sorry, 2 places, page 7 and 14
And given that they can (I believe) terminate your ability to do anything with the content that you "own" at any time, it's like having all of the responsibility of "ownership" without any of the normal benefits of owning it.
It's like "owning" an NFT - yes, we're all impressed you bought a hyperlink, but if you can't do anything with it your "ownership" is meaningless.
I'm taking read through the Commercial OGL 1.1 which was linke out on this post on the previous page, and here are a few bits I'm noticing...
IV. IDENTIFICATION OF LICENSED CONTENT. You must identify in Your Licensed Works which content is Licensed Content and which content is Your Content, in a way that allows a reader of Your Licensed Work to understand the distinction without checking any other document.
COMMENTS: You can identify content in any manner You want to, whether that’s using a different font for Licensed Content than for Your Content, or putting an asterisk next to Licensed Content and telling readers what those distinctions mean; citing to the SRD whenever You use Licensed Content (“Dragonborn (SRD p. 5)”); putting a separate index or list in the back of Your Licensed Work that lists out what, exactly, You used from the SRD; or something else We haven’t thought of but You did. How You do that is entirely up to You; if Your readers can tell what’s what, We’re satisfied. But it is not enough to simply include a statement that Your Licensed Work includes Licensed Content (what used to be called “Open Game Content”). If the only way a reader can distinguish what You created from what We did is to check Your Licensed Work against the SRD, You are not in compliance with this provision.
This is a real corker. Used to be you incuded a disclaimer saying "I used WotC stuff, it's in here too" and that was that. Now, if I make a 150-page document, I need to specifically pull very mention of every WotC content up and reference it so that nobody reading it is in the slightest doubt that Dragonborn were invented by them, not me! I personally would go for the index, for simplicity. I might even make a generic index of every piece of WotC content, whether I used it or not, and slap it at the end of the document as a legalese block to keep their lawyers happy.
Here's an example in the words of whoever wrote this as-yet unverified document:
i. Bruenor Battleaxe, author of Throwing Blades (a 5e Sourcebook), and Blocking Blades (a 5e Campaign) made a lot of money on those publications last year. Given how well Throwing Blades did, Bruenor decides to crowdfund for Blades II: Electric Boogaloo. He includes miniature replica blades as a stretch goal and has a backer-tier that grants access to all stretch goals. The replica blades are not Licensed Works (because they aren’t text-printed or printable) but all revenue from that backer-tier still counts as Qualifying Revenue.
ii. Bruenor runs the same campaign and includes the same miniatures, but makes them available as add-ons for separate purchase. Because the miniatures are not Licensed Works and are being purchased separately, none of the revenue from those purchases is Qualifying Revenue.
Which implies that you can make non-static-document content, but it is not covered by the licence. They don't say "we'll come for Bruenors head", they imply that the physical parts are literally not part of the agreement (though here they are because they are a part of a kickstarter campaign). It also says that making minis for your OGL game does not make those minis licenced content. So separating what has to use the OGL and what doesn't into separate bundles of stuff could hap people with their worries over ownership; I haven't found anything saying that WotC owns your content (they specify they own the licnced content, which is what you're using, not what you're making, but not that they own your content), so iff you make a mini for a Bubberchubb, and then make a statblock for the Bubberchubb, you're going to own the IP because the mini is not icenced, and is therefore your own creation - only the statblock uses the OGL, and WotC only claims the bits you used (EG Str, Dex, Con Etc.) They don't claim the IP, only the mechanics and anthing you do use of theirs (EG Owlbears).
Proof of this unverified document implying that you retain ownership of your own stuff:
III. OWNERSHIP. You agree that We own copyright, trademark, and patent rights, if any, in the Licensed Content and the Unlicensed Content. We reserve all rights not expressly given to You through this agreement. You agree to include any copyright or other rights notices included with the Licensed Content in Your Licensed Works, and You may not impose any additional, different, or inconsistent terms or conditions with respect to the Licensed Content in any license You grant to any Licensed Works.
and the defintions:
i. Usable D&D Content (“Licensed Content”) – This is Dungeons & Dragons content that is included in the SRD v. 5.1, including basic game mechanics and a curated selection of classes, monsters, spells, and items that allow You to make content compatible with Dungeons & Dragons 5th edition.
ii. Not Usable D&D Content (“Unlicensed Content”) – This is Dungeons & Dragons content that has been or later will be produced as “official” – that is, released by Wizards of the Coast or any of its predecessors or successors – and is not present in the SRD v. 5.1. Unlicensed Content includes things like the most famous Dungeons & Dragons monsters, characters, magic spells, and things relating to the various settings used in Dungeons & Dragons official content over the years – what the old Open Game License referred to as “Product Identity.” Unlicensed Content is NOT covered by this agreement, and You agree not to use Unlicensed Content unless Your use is specifically authorized by a separate agreement with Us. If You want to include that content in Your work, You must go through the Dungeon Masters Guild or other official channels.
iii. Your Content – These are the characters, classes, settings, spells, items, new rules, and other creations that You have crafted. They are Your original contributions to the works that You want to sell. This license permits You to combine Your content with the Licensed Content and commercially distribute the resulting works.
notice that there is a difference here between the Licenced Product (being the thing you make) and the Licenced Content (being the stuff WotC is letting you use in your Licenced Product). There is nothing in this document, that I can see, that lets WotC claim ownership of your content, your original material. The legalese makes it a bit hard to get through, but what they are saying is that you agree to say "WotC owns owlbears" and, if you have a separate licence agreement, "JK Rowling owns Hogwarts", when you publish your supplement: "Owlbears Attack Hogwarts".
I jumped to conclusions, then did the research, and was proven wrong.
Thank you for posting your interpretation. I would be interested in your thoughts regarding the 30 day period for them to change the rules of the revenue sharing over 750k or their ability to force 3rd party publishers to stop selling/destroy inventory at a whim. Are these provisions as onerous as they sound or are there safeguards for content producers from Hasbro corporate fiat?
I suspect the 30 day change is to cover them because the now OGL is not something which is agreed to by implication, it is something people have to sign. By signing an agreement, they will need a change of terms clause, like any other agreement (bank accounts, jobs, sales...). Use dto be you said "made with OGL" and that was enough, so anone could do it. Now they're upping the legality of it and need to make sure that if they do need to change it, they are not screwed over.
I can't find the bit that lets them shut people down who are conforming to the licence, cn you help me out there?
B. You own the new and original content You create. You agree to give Us a nonexclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, sub-licensable, royalty-free license to use that content for any purpose.
Under OGL: Commercial at around page 7
Edit: Sorry, 2 places, page 7 and 14
I stand corrected! Though there is the sentiment to contemplate (not legal or anything, but...
X. OTHER PRODUCTS. Sometimes, great minds think alike. We can’t and won’t cancel products out of fear that they’d be seen as “similar to” Licensed Works. Therefore:
Which implies that, as I had suspected, this is purely to cover them aganst people trying to claim that they thought of it first.
Sub-Section B of Section X is not to cover their asses, it's to specifically give themselves the right to republish your work without remunerating you. You can try to argue their "intent" by placing it in that section, but the effect is the same regardless. If you create content under this CGL 1.1, WotC can steal it from you and republish it wherever and whenever they want and not pay you a red cent.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Orcs are savage raiders and pillagers with stooped postures, low foreheads, and piggish faces with prominent lower canines that resemble tusks." MM p245 (original printing) You don't OWN your books on DDB: WotC can change them any time. What do you think will happen when OneD&D comes out?
B. You own the new and original content You create. You agree to give Us a nonexclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, sub-licensable, royalty-free license to use that content for any purpose.
Under OGL: Commercial at around page 7
Edit: Sorry, 2 places, page 7 and 14
I stand corrected! Though there is the sentiment to contemplate (not legal or anything, but...
X. OTHER PRODUCTS. Sometimes, great minds think alike. We can’t and won’t cancel products out of fear that they’d be seen as “similar to” Licensed Works. Therefore:
Which implies that, as I had suspected, this is purely to cover them aganst people trying to claim that they thought of it first.
Yes, the benefit of doubt interpretation would be that they're just protecting their asses with that. I think it's a little hyperbolic to think WotC would straight up steal your stuff, but the option is there. Intention matters somewhat in court (though I wouldn't know anything about it).
B. You own the new and original content You create. You agree to give Us a nonexclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, sub-licensable, royalty-free license to use that content for any purpose.
Under OGL: Commercial at around page 7
Edit: Sorry, 2 places, page 7 and 14
I stand corrected! Though there is the sentiment to contemplate (not legal or anything, but...
X. OTHER PRODUCTS. Sometimes, great minds think alike. We can’t and won’t cancel products out of fear that they’d be seen as “similar to” Licensed Works. Therefore:
Which implies that, as I had suspected, this is purely to cover them aganst people trying to claim that they thought of it first.
Sub-Section B of Section X is not to cover their asses, it's to specifically give themselves the right to republish your work without remunerating you. You can try to argue their "intent" by placing it in that section, but the effect is the same regardless. If you create content under this CGL 1.1, WotC can steal it from you and republish it wherever and whenever they want and not pay you a red cent.
I think it's a bit of a "open your eyes sheeple" kinda argument that in a section which explicitly says "we won't stop making stuff for fear that it's like yours", they say they can publish work that is the same as yours, and to then say it's so they can steal your work. Yes, it would allow them to steal your work, but if they did, how quickly would that resource of third party D&D publishers dry up?
Matter of fact, it's worse. The wording here is bad; they define "Your Work" as the stuff you bring to the table earlier in the document, but they then say that by signing it you agre to give them access to "the new and original content You create". notice the lack of capitals anywhere except "You". This technically means that if you sign this, then write a novel which doesn't contain an D&D stuff, technically they can claim it. I don't think it's how they intended it, but it is how it's written. If they had said "Your Work" in this section, then it would have only applied to stuff made in the OGL.
As someone who own every 5e book, every 4e book and many 3.5 books and an (still) active Beyond subscription, I would call myself a D&D fan. But if this ridicoulus OGL 1.1 or another version of it which is intended to destroy creativity, existences and the community itself, Wizards of the Coast/Hasbro won't. receive. any. further. money. from me. Instead of filling the pockets of this greedy company (which seems to have lost any deceny) all money I have left to spend will go to Paizo and other creators.
I think it's a bit of a "open your eyes sheeple" kinda argument that in a section which explicitly says "we won't stop making stuff for fear that it's like yours", they say they can publish work that is the same as yours, and to then say it's so they can steal your work. Yes, it would allow them to steal your work, but if they did, how quickly would that resource of third party D&D publishers dry up?
Yeah, that's kind of the point. WotC/Hasbro wants to end up effectively being the ONLY game (literally and figuratively) in town. The pool of 3PPs is already going to dry up because anyone who signs on to this document as it is now is an idiot because of Section X, sub B.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Orcs are savage raiders and pillagers with stooped postures, low foreheads, and piggish faces with prominent lower canines that resemble tusks." MM p245 (original printing) You don't OWN your books on DDB: WotC can change them any time. What do you think will happen when OneD&D comes out?
It comes down to this for me, no matter how much I have benefitted from using DNDBeyond in my own gaming I will cease to financially support WoTC if they go through with this OGL1.1 (which lets be real is a closed license).
This really sucks becuase I have spent quitre a bit of money on this site and loose all access to that content is frustrating but if I have to go back to paper character sheets fine, i'd rather do that then support a compnay (WoTC) that wants to cirpple its fans and supporters and gouge us more to be abel to play "the worlds greatest roleplaying game"
guess what you can't call it that if you go through with this OGL1.1
It is unfortunate, but the most likely reason for not having commented at this point is that there's not much they can say at this point that doesn't make them look worse.
As I said in another thread; my guess is they're hoping that the storm will pass if they clam up and refuse to acknowledge it. Hope that the fire of outrage cools off, or people get tired enough of it that when they do release a slightly walked back version, people will just go "oh fine it's not THAT bad" and let it slide. Unfortunately for Hasbro, and fortunately for the hobby as a whole; they've stepped just a bit too far for that to happen, basically every business that does anything in the vicinity of D&D; not just third party publishers, but video makers, artists, paid DMs etc; are wondering if they will have jobs in a year. Furthermore; the language and terms in the document are so egregious that well... frankly based upon the read throughs I've heard: I'm wondering if it's even legal, never mind enforceable. Nobody in their right mind would agree to sign the OGL as is; there are bits that demand you agree to just give up whole legal rights and the like.
The longer they wait, the more creators will abandon ship. This leak has created uncertainty and risk, and many can't just wait in a holding pattern.
When you're threatened, you don't sit around and wait to see if they'll actually attack. You either flee, or you fight.
The smart move, particularly for anyone who is at least a little bit established, is to scrub all works in flight of OGL references and SRD material and put a statement inside that says the content is intended for and compatible with many TTRPG systems. If folks do that, and I've already heard of several who intend to, brand loyalty will decrease.
Of course, that's only one bit of the pie. Everyone who's got a business that isn't based in printed books and static .pdfs has even more uncertainty looming over their heads.
It is unfortunate, but the most likely reason for not having commented at this point is that there's not much they can say at this point that doesn't make them look worse.
As I said in another thread; my guess is they're hoping that the storm will pass if they clam up and refuse to acknowledge it. Hope that the fire of outrage cools off, or people get tired enough of it that when they do release a slightly walked back version, people will just go "oh fine it's not THAT bad" and let it slide. Unfortunately for Hasbro, and fortunately for the hobby as a whole; they've stepped just a bit too far for that to happen, basically every business that does anything in the vicinity of D&D; not just third party publishers, but video makers, artists, paid DMs etc; are wondering if they will have jobs in a year. Furthermore; the language and terms in the document are so egregious that well... frankly based upon the read throughs I've heard: I'm wondering if it's even legal, never mind enforceable. Nobody in their right mind would agree to sign the OGL as is; there are bits that demand you agree to just give up whole legal rights and the like.
The longer they wait, the more creators will abandon ship. This leak has created uncertainty and risk, and many can't just wait in a holding pattern.
When you're threatened, you don't sit around and wait to see if they'll actually attack. You either flee, or you fight.
The smart move, particularly for anyone who is at least a little bit established, is to scrub all works in flight of OGL references and SRD material and put a statement inside that says the content is intended for and compatible with many TTRPG systems. If folks do that, and I've already heard of several who intend to, brand loyalty will decrease.
Of course, that's only one bit of the pie. Everyone who's got a business that isn't based in printed books and static .pdfs has even more uncertainty looming over their heads.
NGL I know it would be a MASSIVE undertaking, but I hope Paizo can release a PF 2.5 (or 3?) stripping out all OGL stuff, and then make their own Pathfinder OGL.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Orcs are savage raiders and pillagers with stooped postures, low foreheads, and piggish faces with prominent lower canines that resemble tusks." MM p245 (original printing) You don't OWN your books on DDB: WotC can change them any time. What do you think will happen when OneD&D comes out?
B. You own the new and original content You create. You agree to give Us a nonexclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, sub-licensable, royalty-free license to use that content for any purpose.
Under OGL: Commercial at around page 7
Edit: Sorry, 2 places, page 7 and 14
I stand corrected! Though there is the sentiment to contemplate (not legal or anything, but...
X. OTHER PRODUCTS. Sometimes, great minds think alike. We can’t and won’t cancel products out of fear that they’d be seen as “similar to” Licensed Works. Therefore:
Which implies that, as I had suspected, this is purely to cover them aganst people trying to claim that they thought of it first.
Yes, the benefit of doubt interpretation would be that they're just protecting their asses with that. I think it's a little hyperbolic to think WotC would straight up steal your stuff, but the option is there. Intention matters somewhat in court (though I wouldn't know anything about it).
I agree that the present intent is very likely just to protect themselves. However even if that is true, as with their attempt to "de-authorize" OGL 1.0a, we don't need to just worry about the intent of those who write the license but also the intent of those who will come later and see what loopholes they can exploit in it.
They are right now being a very clear cautionary tale in absolutely not giving them the benefit of the doubt because the current people in charge have a certain intent. If they are backing out of their past promises because it wasn't perfectly stated in the license itself, then publishers would be fools to think some future exec would never try the same thing with this as well.
When they show us what little regard they have for past intent, we should believe them.
P.S. Edit to add that I’m not directing at you since I agree with you, just your message seemed most pertinent one to reply to in thread. :)
As paying costumer for many years, I have personally introduced well over 50 people into the hobby through starting and maintaining game clubs and discord servers.
I own multiple copies of almost every book. I use DnDBeyond regularly. I make homebrew. I help people with rules, I give advice on campaigns.
And I will stop using DnD, I will abandon 5e, and I will start using some other system, one that welcomes creators, fans, homebrewers, DM's and players.
WotC/Hasbro is striking at the very core of what makes DnD5e great, the community.
This new OGL is a blatant money-grab scheme. The higher ups in the company very clearly does not understand what they are doing, since they are trying to harm the very pillars 5e stands on. I can with a large level of certainty say that most DM's has a 3rd party book that they love, that supplements their game and playstyle perfectly. That 3rd party book is essential for that DM to continue that campaign. It is the final puzzle piece. Removing that piece will not make them use something else from WotC, because WotC does not provide that piece, and if you have ever laid a puzzle and have missed one piece at the end, you will have a small part of the feeling that DM will have.
The physical books won't disappear, but there won't be any new ones. The final puzzle piece won't even be made.
DnD5e will go from the most supported system, to the least supported system, overnight.
The harm to the other companies that has relied on the original OGL will also be immense.
As an example, let us for the sake of argument say that Paizo has to pay a 25% royalty on every dollar they make over 750,000$.
Paizo as the biggest competitor to WotC had a revenue of approximately 12 million $
They would have to pay 25% of 11,250,000 which comes out to 2,812,500$
Now, Paizo had a net income of 3,180,000.
Paizo, DnD's biggest competitor would have their profits reduced from 3,180,000$ to 367,000$. Effectively reducing their profit with a factor of 10.
It is pertinent to mention that these numbers are from 2021, one of Paizos best years, one of their most profitable years.
Now, I am sure that Paizo wouldn't actually pay that much, they have the money and manpower to avoid all this, they can sell PF2 books, they have their own licensing deals, they have secondary revenue streams.
Smaller creators do not, a smaller publisher would crumble if their margins where that tight.
The new OGL isn't just a overreaching move made from corporate greed, it isn't just driving players and DM's new and old away from the hobby, it is actively harming the entire TTRPG hobby.
I will be advising, every person I know that is involved in the hobby to find an alternative system, unless the original OGL is honored.
We have made this hobby what it is, and we can rebuild somewhere else.
Yeah, this is specifically designed to kill 3rd party. Also the clause for sublicense of 3rd party content is insanity. Almost none of this holds up under EU IP laws. It is a USA targetted play in the hopes of winning lawsuits under US corporation sympathetic laws.
I'm going to say if my investments into products that I use to play D&D (Foundry VTT, map-making software, etc.) suddenly no longer work with D&D per this new OGL then I will be switching systems.
I hyper-focus and particularly love 5e but if I suddenly am told that the things I've spent money and time on are not able to be used for the intent I bought them for then I'm out. I would also ABSOLUTELY boycott Hasbro, delete my D&D Beyond subscription, and shut down my MTG account.
This is far worse than "we pulled lore out of old books because we don't like it anymore" it's "we're taking away your ability to use things you already paid for."
Edit: Also, based on the existing wording it is TERRIBLY phrased and basically entitles Hasbro to pilfer anyone's content at any time for their own use. Capping it off with a method of punishing anyone who complains by just giving them 30 days' notice and removing their ability to create for the system.
And I don't trust it is a method to prevent offensive content being created when it comes from a company that made the Hadozee...
WotC/Hasbro is striking at the very core of what makes DnD5e great, the community.
It's funny. I've been in the IT world for 30 years. Every time I see a company hire someone to run their entire technology team who has no real technical IT experience I facepalm. When WotC / Hasbro hires a non-TTRPG gamer with no TTRPG experience or knowledge to rdevelop / run game and it's community that is VERY different than other gaming industries. I want to facepalm. Their off-the-shelf knowledge of the gaming industry just doesn't translate to the TTRPG community.
It's like trying to manage artist like they are assembly line workers. It doesn't jive, so all I can say it good luck with that.
I wonder if Cynthia Williams will survive this. I'm not a betting man, but even if I was. I certainly wouldn't bet on that. Even without ever releasing the OGL 1.1. The other post was right. The damage is done and the trust with WotC is broken.
As paying costumer for many years, I have personally introduced well over 50 people into the hobby through starting and maintaining game clubs and discord servers.
I own multiple copies of almost every book. I use DnDBeyond regularly. I make homebrew. I help people with rules, I give advice on campaigns.
And I will stop using DnD, I will abandon 5e, and I will start using some other system, one that welcomes creators, fans, homebrewers, DM's and players.
WotC/Hasbro is striking at the very core of what makes DnD5e great, the community.
This new OGL is a blatant money-grab scheme. The higher ups in the company very clearly does not understand what they are doing, since they are trying to harm the very pillars 5e stands on. I can with a large level of certainty say that most DM's has a 3rd party book that they love, that supplements their game and playstyle perfectly. That 3rd party book is essential for that DM to continue that campaign. It is the final puzzle piece. Removing that piece will not make them use something else from WotC, because WotC does not provide that piece, and if you have ever laid a puzzle and have missed one piece at the end, you will have a small part of the feeling that DM will have.
The physical books won't disappear, but there won't be any new ones. The final puzzle piece won't even be made.
DnD5e will go from the most supported system, to the least supported system, overnight.
The harm to the other companies that has relied on the original OGL will also be immense.
As an example, let us for the sake of argument say that Paizo has to pay a 25% royalty on every dollar they make over 750,000$.
Paizo as the biggest competitor to WotC had a revenue of approximately 12 million $
They would have to pay 25% of 11,250,000 which comes out to 2,812,500$
Now, Paizo had a net income of 3,180,000.
Paizo, DnD's biggest competitor would have their profits reduced from 3,180,000$ to 367,000$. Effectively reducing their profit with a factor of 10.
It is pertinent to mention that these numbers are from 2021, one of Paizos best years, one of their most profitable years.
Now, I am sure that Paizo wouldn't actually pay that much, they have the money and manpower to avoid all this, they can sell PF2 books, they have their own licensing deals, they have secondary revenue streams.
Smaller creators do not, a smaller publisher would crumble if their margins where that tight.
The new OGL isn't just a overreaching move made from corporate greed, it isn't just driving players and DM's new and old away from the hobby, it is actively harming the entire TTRPG hobby.
I will be advising, every person I know that is involved in the hobby to find an alternative system, unless the original OGL is honored.
We have made this hobby what it is, and we can rebuild somewhere else.
This is the kind of data that will make the situation clear to everyone involved in the hobby and the impact to all the 3rd Party Publishers - notably to their employee base. When a company's net profit is reduced by that amount, it's not just the "big company" that's affected. That kind of change leaves a large number of people wondering how they feed their families.
I'll state it again: for those who don't consider this "their problem", consider how you'd react if a company whose "perpetual" license you'd relied on for over 20 years suddenly invalidated it and insisted on taking royalties that mean your chosen profession is no longer possible? I watched a video by The Dungeon Coach last night who was obviously deeply affected by the OGL decision - he made the decision to move into content production as a full time job just 6 months ago, leaving a career in education behind. Now he, as the sole breadwinner for his family of four, is in a position where all his plans have suddenly been upended through no fault of his own. Countless other 3rd Party publishers and YouTube content providers are going thru exactly the same calculus as we speak.
Consider how you would react to that situation if you were in it. Also consider how your actions here may either support or further hurt those deeply affected by Hasbro and WoTC's decision to countermand a promise made 23 years ago.
There remains an open letter on opendnd.games. I encourage everyone to take the less than 5 minutes it takes to sign it and show your support for those affected by WoTC's decision.
I'm going to say if my investments into products that I use to play D&D (Foundry VTT, map-making software, etc.) suddenly no longer work with D&D per this new OGL then I will be switching systems.
I hyper-focus and particularly love 5e but if I suddenly am told that the things I've spent money and time on are not able to be used for the intent I bought them for then I'm out. I would also ABSOLUTELY boycott Hasbro, delete my D&D Beyond subscription, and shut down my MTG account.
This is far worse than "we pulled lore out of old books because we don't like it anymore" it's "we're taking away your ability to use things you already paid for."
Edit: Also, based on the existing wording it is TERRIBLY phrased and basically entitles Hasbro to pilfer anyone's content at any time for their own use. Capping it off with a method of punishing anyone who complains by just giving them 30 days' notice and removing their ability to create for the system.
And I don't trust it is a method to prevent offensive content being created when it comes from a company that made the Hadozee...
Completely agree!
To those of us who are players and not neccarily content creators- we are being told that the things we have paid for and investied time is are no longer able to be used.
This is the kind of data that will make the situation clear to everyone involved in the hobby and the impact to all the 3rd Party Publishers - notably to their employee base. When a company's net profit is reduced by that amount, it's not just the "big company" that's affected. That kind of change leaves a large number of people wondering how they feed their families.
I'll state it again: for those who don't consider this "their problem", consider how you'd react if a company whose "perpetual" license you'd relied on for over 20 years suddenly invalidated it and insisted on taking royalties that mean your chosen profession is no longer possible? I watched a video by The Dungeon Coach last night who was obviously deeply affected by the OGL decision - he made the decision to move into content production as a full time job just 6 months ago, leaving a career in education behind. Now he, as the sole breadwinner for his family of four, is in a position where all his plans have suddenly been upended through no fault of his own. Countless other 3rd Party publishers and YouTube content providers are going thru exactly the same calculus as we speak.
Consider how you would react to that situation if you were in it. Also consider how your actions here may either support or further hurt those deeply affected by Hasbro and WoTC's decision to countermand a promise made 23 years ago.
There remains an open letter on opendnd.games. I encourage everyone to take the less than 5 minutes it takes to sign it and show your support for those affected by WoTC's decision.
I also recommend to write physical letters to the CEOs of Hasbro and Wizards. Maybe sanity is recovered when taking some baths in physical complains. There are premade letters in the Internet you can use.
And given that they can (I believe) terminate your ability to do anything with the content that you "own" at any time, it's like having all of the responsibility of "ownership" without any of the normal benefits of owning it.
It's like "owning" an NFT - yes, we're all impressed you bought a hyperlink, but if you can't do anything with it your "ownership" is meaningless.
I suspect the 30 day change is to cover them because the now OGL is not something which is agreed to by implication, it is something people have to sign. By signing an agreement, they will need a change of terms clause, like any other agreement (bank accounts, jobs, sales...). Use dto be you said "made with OGL" and that was enough, so anone could do it. Now they're upping the legality of it and need to make sure that if they do need to change it, they are not screwed over.
I can't find the bit that lets them shut people down who are conforming to the licence, cn you help me out there?
Make your Artificer work with any other class with 174 Multiclassing Feats for your Artificer Multiclass Character!
DM's Guild Releases on This Thread Or check them all out on DMs Guild!
DrivethruRPG Releases on This Thread - latest release: My Character is a Werewolf: balanced rules for Lycanthropy!
I have started discussing/reviewing 3rd party D&D content on Substack - stay tuned for semi-regular posts!
Sub-Section B of Section X is not to cover their asses, it's to specifically give themselves the right to republish your work without remunerating you. You can try to argue their "intent" by placing it in that section, but the effect is the same regardless. If you create content under this CGL 1.1, WotC can steal it from you and republish it wherever and whenever they want and not pay you a red cent.
"Orcs are savage raiders and pillagers with stooped postures, low foreheads, and piggish faces with prominent lower canines that resemble tusks." MM p245 (original printing)
You don't OWN your books on DDB: WotC can change them any time. What do you think will happen when OneD&D comes out?
Yes, the benefit of doubt interpretation would be that they're just protecting their asses with that. I think it's a little hyperbolic to think WotC would straight up steal your stuff, but the option is there. Intention matters somewhat in court (though I wouldn't know anything about it).
I think it's a bit of a "open your eyes sheeple" kinda argument that in a section which explicitly says "we won't stop making stuff for fear that it's like yours", they say they can publish work that is the same as yours, and to then say it's so they can steal your work. Yes, it would allow them to steal your work, but if they did, how quickly would that resource of third party D&D publishers dry up?
Matter of fact, it's worse. The wording here is bad; they define "Your Work" as the stuff you bring to the table earlier in the document, but they then say that by signing it you agre to give them access to "the new and original content You create". notice the lack of capitals anywhere except "You". This technically means that if you sign this, then write a novel which doesn't contain an D&D stuff, technically they can claim it. I don't think it's how they intended it, but it is how it's written. If they had said "Your Work" in this section, then it would have only applied to stuff made in the OGL.
Make your Artificer work with any other class with 174 Multiclassing Feats for your Artificer Multiclass Character!
DM's Guild Releases on This Thread Or check them all out on DMs Guild!
DrivethruRPG Releases on This Thread - latest release: My Character is a Werewolf: balanced rules for Lycanthropy!
I have started discussing/reviewing 3rd party D&D content on Substack - stay tuned for semi-regular posts!
As someone who own every 5e book, every 4e book and many 3.5 books and an (still) active Beyond subscription, I would call myself a D&D fan. But if this ridicoulus OGL 1.1 or another version of it which is intended to destroy creativity, existences and the community itself, Wizards of the Coast/Hasbro won't. receive. any. further. money. from me. Instead of filling the pockets of this greedy company (which seems to have lost any deceny) all money I have left to spend will go to Paizo and other creators.
Yeah, that's kind of the point. WotC/Hasbro wants to end up effectively being the ONLY game (literally and figuratively) in town. The pool of 3PPs is already going to dry up because anyone who signs on to this document as it is now is an idiot because of Section X, sub B.
"Orcs are savage raiders and pillagers with stooped postures, low foreheads, and piggish faces with prominent lower canines that resemble tusks." MM p245 (original printing)
You don't OWN your books on DDB: WotC can change them any time. What do you think will happen when OneD&D comes out?
It comes down to this for me, no matter how much I have benefitted from using DNDBeyond in my own gaming I will cease to financially support WoTC if they go through with this OGL1.1 (which lets be real is a closed license).
This really sucks becuase I have spent quitre a bit of money on this site and loose all access to that content is frustrating but if I have to go back to paper character sheets fine, i'd rather do that then support a compnay (WoTC) that wants to cirpple its fans and supporters and gouge us more to be abel to play "the worlds greatest roleplaying game"
guess what you can't call it that if you go through with this OGL1.1
The longer they wait, the more creators will abandon ship. This leak has created uncertainty and risk, and many can't just wait in a holding pattern.
When you're threatened, you don't sit around and wait to see if they'll actually attack. You either flee, or you fight.
The smart move, particularly for anyone who is at least a little bit established, is to scrub all works in flight of OGL references and SRD material and put a statement inside that says the content is intended for and compatible with many TTRPG systems. If folks do that, and I've already heard of several who intend to, brand loyalty will decrease.
Of course, that's only one bit of the pie. Everyone who's got a business that isn't based in printed books and static .pdfs has even more uncertainty looming over their heads.
NGL I know it would be a MASSIVE undertaking, but I hope Paizo can release a PF 2.5 (or 3?) stripping out all OGL stuff, and then make their own Pathfinder OGL.
"Orcs are savage raiders and pillagers with stooped postures, low foreheads, and piggish faces with prominent lower canines that resemble tusks." MM p245 (original printing)
You don't OWN your books on DDB: WotC can change them any time. What do you think will happen when OneD&D comes out?
I agree that the present intent is very likely just to protect themselves. However even if that is true, as with their attempt to "de-authorize" OGL 1.0a, we don't need to just worry about the intent of those who write the license but also the intent of those who will come later and see what loopholes they can exploit in it.
They are right now being a very clear cautionary tale in absolutely not giving them the benefit of the doubt because the current people in charge have a certain intent. If they are backing out of their past promises because it wasn't perfectly stated in the license itself, then publishers would be fools to think some future exec would never try the same thing with this as well.
When they show us what little regard they have for past intent, we should believe them.
P.S. Edit to add that I’m not directing at you since I agree with you, just your message seemed most pertinent one to reply to in thread. :)
As paying costumer for many years, I have personally introduced well over 50 people into the hobby through starting and maintaining game clubs and discord servers.
I own multiple copies of almost every book. I use DnDBeyond regularly. I make homebrew. I help people with rules, I give advice on campaigns.
And I will stop using DnD, I will abandon 5e, and I will start using some other system, one that welcomes creators, fans, homebrewers, DM's and players.
WotC/Hasbro is striking at the very core of what makes DnD5e great, the community.
This new OGL is a blatant money-grab scheme. The higher ups in the company very clearly does not understand what they are doing, since they are trying to harm the very pillars 5e stands on. I can with a large level of certainty say that most DM's has a 3rd party book that they love, that supplements their game and playstyle perfectly. That 3rd party book is essential for that DM to continue that campaign. It is the final puzzle piece. Removing that piece will not make them use something else from WotC, because WotC does not provide that piece, and if you have ever laid a puzzle and have missed one piece at the end, you will have a small part of the feeling that DM will have.
The physical books won't disappear, but there won't be any new ones. The final puzzle piece won't even be made.
DnD5e will go from the most supported system, to the least supported system, overnight.
The harm to the other companies that has relied on the original OGL will also be immense.
As an example, let us for the sake of argument say that Paizo has to pay a 25% royalty on every dollar they make over 750,000$.
Paizo as the biggest competitor to WotC had a revenue of approximately 12 million $
They would have to pay 25% of 11,250,000 which comes out to 2,812,500$
Now, Paizo had a net income of 3,180,000.
Paizo, DnD's biggest competitor would have their profits reduced from 3,180,000$ to 367,000$. Effectively reducing their profit with a factor of 10.
It is pertinent to mention that these numbers are from 2021, one of Paizos best years, one of their most profitable years.
Now, I am sure that Paizo wouldn't actually pay that much, they have the money and manpower to avoid all this, they can sell PF2 books, they have their own licensing deals, they have secondary revenue streams.
Smaller creators do not, a smaller publisher would crumble if their margins where that tight.
The new OGL isn't just a overreaching move made from corporate greed, it isn't just driving players and DM's new and old away from the hobby, it is actively harming the entire TTRPG hobby.
I will be advising, every person I know that is involved in the hobby to find an alternative system, unless the original OGL is honored.
We have made this hobby what it is, and we can rebuild somewhere else.
Yeah, this is specifically designed to kill 3rd party. Also the clause for sublicense of 3rd party content is insanity. Almost none of this holds up under EU IP laws. It is a USA targetted play in the hopes of winning lawsuits under US corporation sympathetic laws.
I'm going to say if my investments into products that I use to play D&D (Foundry VTT, map-making software, etc.) suddenly no longer work with D&D per this new OGL then I will be switching systems.
I hyper-focus and particularly love 5e but if I suddenly am told that the things I've spent money and time on are not able to be used for the intent I bought them for then I'm out. I would also ABSOLUTELY boycott Hasbro, delete my D&D Beyond subscription, and shut down my MTG account.
This is far worse than "we pulled lore out of old books because we don't like it anymore" it's "we're taking away your ability to use things you already paid for."
Edit: Also, based on the existing wording it is TERRIBLY phrased and basically entitles Hasbro to pilfer anyone's content at any time for their own use. Capping it off with a method of punishing anyone who complains by just giving them 30 days' notice and removing their ability to create for the system.
And I don't trust it is a method to prevent offensive content being created when it comes from a company that made the Hadozee...
It's funny. I've been in the IT world for 30 years. Every time I see a company hire someone to run their entire technology team who has no real technical IT experience I facepalm. When WotC / Hasbro hires a non-TTRPG gamer with no TTRPG experience or knowledge to rdevelop / run game and it's community that is VERY different than other gaming industries. I want to facepalm. Their off-the-shelf knowledge of the gaming industry just doesn't translate to the TTRPG community.
It's like trying to manage artist like they are assembly line workers. It doesn't jive, so all I can say it good luck with that.
I wonder if Cynthia Williams will survive this. I'm not a betting man, but even if I was. I certainly wouldn't bet on that. Even without ever releasing the OGL 1.1. The other post was right. The damage is done and the trust with WotC is broken.
Info, Inflow, Overload. Knowledge Black Hole Imminent!
/sign in every single word
Really well done, Crige1!
This is the kind of data that will make the situation clear to everyone involved in the hobby and the impact to all the 3rd Party Publishers - notably to their employee base. When a company's net profit is reduced by that amount, it's not just the "big company" that's affected. That kind of change leaves a large number of people wondering how they feed their families.
I'll state it again: for those who don't consider this "their problem", consider how you'd react if a company whose "perpetual" license you'd relied on for over 20 years suddenly invalidated it and insisted on taking royalties that mean your chosen profession is no longer possible? I watched a video by The Dungeon Coach last night who was obviously deeply affected by the OGL decision - he made the decision to move into content production as a full time job just 6 months ago, leaving a career in education behind. Now he, as the sole breadwinner for his family of four, is in a position where all his plans have suddenly been upended through no fault of his own. Countless other 3rd Party publishers and YouTube content providers are going thru exactly the same calculus as we speak.
Consider how you would react to that situation if you were in it. Also consider how your actions here may either support or further hurt those deeply affected by Hasbro and WoTC's decision to countermand a promise made 23 years ago.
There remains an open letter on opendnd.games. I encourage everyone to take the less than 5 minutes it takes to sign it and show your support for those affected by WoTC's decision.
#OpenDND - opendnd.games
Completely agree!
To those of us who are players and not neccarily content creators- we are being told that the things we have paid for and investied time is are no longer able to be used.
I also recommend to write physical letters to the CEOs of Hasbro and Wizards. Maybe sanity is recovered when taking some baths in physical complains. There are premade letters in the Internet you can use.
LOL - no wonder I felt like you were in my head. I've been in the same industry since before Win95 was the hot new thing. :D
#OpenDND - opendnd.games