I take DnD Beyond's clarification statement at face value. They're going back to the drawing board, working on it some more, to make it seem less terrible in the eyes of the community. They apologized. They tried to be kind, gracious, and humble toward a community that's spitting a lot of venom.
When someone apologizes and tries to make things right, why not just give them the benefit of the doubt and forgive them?
We've all done wrong, and we all need forgiveness.
But they didn't really come clean, did they? Their response lacks accountability. When a child steals candy from the store, for example, good parents make the child admit to those they wronged and apologize. They don't accept "I'm sorry this candy fell into my pocket. I will try to dodge it next time." Similarly, I am not accepting their really bad attempt at shifting the narrative to "we accidentally sent these secret contracts to people, with a deadline to sign them of one week. But we planned all along to listen to your feedback by telling you after all of the contracts were signed."
I think everyone is angry, for good reason, and each one of us has different level of expectation how they can resolve it. We should keep that in mind without insulting someone's else draw in the sand. Obviously they won't be able to reach everyone with an appropriate resolution. For myself, my draw in the sand is the OGL 1.0a. Don't touch it. Confirm to everyone that it is perpetual and un-revocable and that you won't go after anyone publishing under that OGL 1.0a considering that their work respect the OGL 1.0a as written. That is all.
Now if you want to publish some new books or platform which won't be under the OGL 1.0a like you did for Tasha's Cauldron, fine....you do that and we will see eventually if i have to chose where i'm going with my money.
"we accidentally sent these secret contracts to people, with a deadline to sign them of one week. But we planned all along to listen to your feedback by telling you after all of the contracts were signed."
Yeah. Lies, Pandering, and trivialization of real issues. Also misdirection "Oh we jus' want to protect you from the nasty NFTs, mkay?"
I think there was a missed opportunity here. A serious breach of trust occurred. We can argue intentional or not but ultimately it doesn't matter since the communal perception is that this was an attempt to kill 3p content.
What they should have done is completely own up to it and show some sort of outreach. There was no ownership or accountability just a lot of pr spinning.
When will they learn being genuine and truthful will get you so much farther than abdicating responsibility
I think there was a missed opportunity here. A serious breach of trust occurred. We can argue intentional or not but ultimately it doesn't matter since the communal perception is that this was an attempt to kill 3p content.
What they should have done is completely own up to it and show some sort of outreach. There was no ownership or accountability just a lot of pr spinning.
When will they learn being genuine and truthful will get you so much farther than abdicating responsibility
The correct response was not to apologize or explain, it was to abandon any and all attempts to invalidate 1.0a. Just that, walk away, and let things settle.
Instead it's all lies and gaslighting, and they clearly missed the entire point.
At this point, given the track record of corporate "thought" companies exhibit throughout the US and many other countries, I do not plan to continue to use BD&D nor purchase any WOTC/Hasbro products until they back down and guarantee that the OGL truly remains OPEN.
The OGL was created at a time when WOTC was trying to save D&D and make it successful and a vital part of the TTRPG hobby once again. And it worked! To turn around and try to take that away from the gaming industry and players is a slap in the face to those who made it possible for D&D to become what it is today.
In my optimistic world, I hope that I will be back and be able to purchase WOTC/Hasbro games and game content with a clear conscience. However, that will completely depend on what their final decision turns out to be.
The most important parts of that not apology is this statement:
Content *already* released under 1.0a will also remain unaffected.
This makes it clear that they believe they can, and thus WILL change the license however they see fit whenever they see fit. That one word tells you that they do not believe that 1.0a is irrevocable and therefore they have the rights to do anything they can.
well.. duh.. because legally speaking when you put in the word "authorised" in a text and then revoke authorisation afterwards, you're in the clear.
mind you, I don't like it one bit and am happy that they are suffering the backlash, I hope they will backtrack all the way under the bridge they crawled out from, but legally speaking, this is a solid argument in their favour.... we just have to continue making them see that despite the law being on their side, it is financially speaking in their best interest to keep things as they were and focus the new ogl on bolstering the old one whilst also doing what is right to them, namely safeguarding their new projects (VTT and such) and updating the OGL to the current era of webcontent... the OGL was still conceived with books in mind, and modules, and the costs of printing and distributing... today's tech makes all of that obsolete. so it stands to reason that they would try to place some safeguards... they just swung the pendulum way too far the other end and destroyed their credibility by trying to nuke the very people that kept the game alive and relevant whilst they were faffing about with 4th edition, and who made 5e the success that it is.
What would "signing on" to ORC entail? If it's truly an open license, they'll be able to publish whatever they want through it just like everyone else will, and still have their own OGL and DMsGuild licenses.
"we accidentally sent these secret contracts to people, with a deadline to sign them of one week. But we planned all along to listen to your feedback by telling you after all of the contracts were signed."
Yeah. Lies, Pandering, and trivialization of real issues. Also misdirection "Oh we jus' want to protect you from the nasty NFTs, mkay?"
Don't forget! They want to protect you against nasty NFT's... except when they are the one selling them to you.
I get where you are coming from prklts but when an organisation destroys the trust they built up over years with a very aggressive change of policy that is leaked and then say "we were only asking for feedback". How can you trust them? They clearly never asked for feedback and are lying in the very clarification statement which is trying to reduce the damage their own actions caused. Business is all about trust. How can anyone do business with wotc until they come clean?
Absolutely. They lost a lot of trust and this does almost nothing to rebuild it. Releasing 1.0b which is identical to 1.0a but includes the word irrevocable in the right place - that would restore trust.
They can then decide whether or not to release an SRD for onednd or what licence agreements they want to offer for that product but at least third party creators would know where they stand on 5e and their current products and kickstarters.
But they didn't really come clean, did they? Their response lacks accountability. When a child steals candy from the store, for example, good parents make the child admit to those they wronged and apologize. They don't accept "I'm sorry this candy fell into my pocket. I will try to dodge it next time." Similarly, I am not accepting their really bad attempt at shifting the narrative to "we accidentally sent these secret contracts to people, with a deadline to sign them of one week. But we planned all along to listen to your feedback by telling you after all of the contracts were signed."
I think everyone is angry, for good reason, and each one of us has different level of expectation how they can resolve it. We should keep that in mind without insulting someone's else draw in the sand. Obviously they won't be able to reach everyone with an appropriate resolution. For myself, my draw in the sand is the OGL 1.0a. Don't touch it. Confirm to everyone that it is perpetual and un-revocable and that you won't go after anyone publishing under that OGL 1.0a considering that their work respect the OGL 1.0a as written. That is all.
Now if you want to publish some new books or platform which won't be under the OGL 1.0a like you did for Tasha's Cauldron, fine....you do that and we will see eventually if i have to chose where i'm going with my money.
Yeah. Lies, Pandering, and trivialization of real issues. Also misdirection "Oh we jus' want to protect you from the nasty NFTs, mkay?"
WATCH THIS VIDEO IF YOU HAVEN'T ALREADY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6U7Ky0AD_M
X
No thanks, not clicking a youtube video from a 1 post account
edit: that's just a critcrab vid from late last night, usual repeating of talking points.
that was from before this:
https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1423-an-update-on-the-open-game-license-ogl
i'm actually waiting for my youtube feed to start populating with videos about the latest update.
I think there was a missed opportunity here. A serious breach of trust occurred. We can argue intentional or not but ultimately it doesn't matter since the communal perception is that this was an attempt to kill 3p content.
What they should have done is completely own up to it and show some sort of outreach. There was no ownership or accountability just a lot of pr spinning.
When will they learn being genuine and truthful will get you so much farther than abdicating responsibility
The correct response was not to apologize or explain, it was to abandon any and all attempts to invalidate 1.0a. Just that, walk away, and let things settle.
Instead it's all lies and gaslighting, and they clearly missed the entire point.
At this point, given the track record of corporate "thought" companies exhibit throughout the US and many other countries, I do not plan to continue to use BD&D nor purchase any WOTC/Hasbro products until they back down and guarantee that the OGL truly remains OPEN.
The OGL was created at a time when WOTC was trying to save D&D and make it successful and a vital part of the TTRPG hobby once again. And it worked! To turn around and try to take that away from the gaming industry and players is a slap in the face to those who made it possible for D&D to become what it is today.
In my optimistic world, I hope that I will be back and be able to purchase WOTC/Hasbro games and game content with a clear conscience. However, that will completely depend on what their final decision turns out to be.
well.. duh.. because legally speaking when you put in the word "authorised" in a text and then revoke authorisation afterwards, you're in the clear.
mind you, I don't like it one bit and am happy that they are suffering the backlash, I hope they will backtrack all the way under the bridge they crawled out from, but legally speaking, this is a solid argument in their favour.... we just have to continue making them see that despite the law being on their side, it is financially speaking in their best interest to keep things as they were and focus the new ogl on bolstering the old one whilst also doing what is right to them, namely safeguarding their new projects (VTT and such) and updating the OGL to the current era of webcontent... the OGL was still conceived with books in mind, and modules, and the costs of printing and distributing... today's tech makes all of that obsolete. so it stands to reason that they would try to place some safeguards... they just swung the pendulum way too far the other end and destroyed their credibility by trying to nuke the very people that kept the game alive and relevant whilst they were faffing about with 4th edition, and who made 5e the success that it is.
What would "signing on" to ORC entail? If it's truly an open license, they'll be able to publish whatever they want through it just like everyone else will, and still have their own OGL and DMsGuild licenses.
No one knows yet , its only just been announced and hasnt been put into effect yet.
Don't forget! They want to protect you against nasty NFT's... except when they are the one selling them to you.
I get where you are coming from prklts but when an organisation destroys the trust they built up over years with a very aggressive change of policy that is leaked and then say "we were only asking for feedback". How can you trust them? They clearly never asked for feedback and are lying in the very clarification statement which is trying to reduce the damage their own actions caused. Business is all about trust. How can anyone do business with wotc until they come clean?
#Opendnd
Absolutely. They lost a lot of trust and this does almost nothing to rebuild it. Releasing 1.0b which is identical to 1.0a but includes the word irrevocable in the right place - that would restore trust.
They can then decide whether or not to release an SRD for onednd or what licence agreements they want to offer for that product but at least third party creators would know where they stand on 5e and their current products and kickstarters.
#Opendnd
Hey, we ‘ both’ won, right? Right?
Yea, it's just an image thing. You nailed it.