Draft Wizards of the Coast VTT Policy ..................................................................................................... 6
OGL 1.2 Draft Survey
Table of Contents
Introduction to System Reference Document 5.1
MANY WAYS TO CREATE. Dungeons & Dragons content is available to you in many ways:
The core D&D mechanics, which are located at pages 56-104, 254-260, and 358-359 of this System Reference Document 5.1 (but not the examples used on those pages), are licensed to you under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0). This means that Wizards is not placing any limitations at all on how you use that content.
Our copyright rights in the other content included in this System Reference Document are licensed to you under the Open Game License 1.2.
Use of D&D content in streaming, fan art, cosplay, and other fan content is permitted as described in Wizards’ Fan Content Policy.
Platforms such as D&D Beyond and DMs Guild provide additional paths to share your D&D content under different license terms.
CREATOR PRODUCT BADGES. For content published under the OGL 1.2, you may use one of following badges in the manner specified in the Creator Product Badge Style Guide. So long as you comply with that guide in using the badges, Wizards licenses you under the OGL 1.2 to use such a badge on any of Your Licensed Works.
NOTICE OF DEAUTHORIZATION OF OGL 1.0a. The Open Game License 1.0a is no longer an authorized license. This means that you may not use that version of the OGL, or any prior version, to publish SRD content after (effective date). It does not mean that any content previously published under that version needs to update to this license. Any previously published content remains licensed under whichever version of the OGL was in effect when you published that content.
System Reference Document 5.1
Preamble
Open Game License 1.2
This is a License between Wizards of the Coast LLC (“Wizards,” “us,” “we,” “our”) and anyone who wants to use the licensed content in their own TTRPG (“you,” “your”). By using Our Licensed Content, you agree to the terms of this license. As used in this license, “we” (or any other term referring to us) includes our affiliates, successors, and predecessors.
LICENSED CONTENT
Content Covered
OurLicensed Content. This license covers any content in the SRD 5.1 (or any subsequent version of the SRD we release under this license) that is not licensed to you under Creative Commons. You may use that content in your own works on the terms of this license.
Our Unlicensed Content. Only Our Licensed Content is licensed under this license. Any other content we release or have released is not licensed to you under this license.
Your Content. This is your creative contributions to your works that are not Our Licensed Content or Our Unlicensed Content. This license permits you to combine Your Content with Our Licensed Content and distribute the resulting works as authorized by this license.
Works Covered. This license only applies to printed media and static electronic files (such as epubs or pdfs) you create for use in or as tabletop roleplaying games and supplements (“TTRPGs”) and in virtual tabletops in accordance with our Virtual Tabletop Policy (“VTTs”).
Your Licensed Works. To be a Licensed Work under this license, it must:
be a covered work as defined in Section 1(b);
contain both Our Licensed Content and Your Content; and
not contain Our Unlicensed Content.
We are only licensing you our copyrights in Our Licensed Content, except that under Section 5(a) we also grant you a trademark license to the Creator Product badge, as further detailed in the Creator Product Badge Style Guide. You receive no other rights to our trademarks, and no rights to any other intellectual property we own.
In consideration for your compliance with this license, you may copy, use, modify and distribute Our Licensed Content around the world as part of Your Licensed Works. This license is perpetual (meaning that it has no set end date), non-exclusive (meaning that we may offer others a license to Our Licensed Content or Our Unlicensed Content under any conditions we choose), and irrevocable (meaning that content licensed under this license can never be withdrawn from the license). It also cannot be modified except for the attribution provisions of Section 5 and Section 9(a) regarding notices.
WHAT YOU OWN. Your Licensed Works are yours. They may not be copied or used without your permission.
You acknowledge that we and our licensees, as content creators ourselves, might independently come up with content similar to something you create. If you have a claim that we breached this provision, or that one of our licensees did in connection with content they licensed from us:
Any such claim will be brought only as a lawsuit for breach of contract, and only for money damages. You expressly agree that money damages are an adequate remedy for such a breach, and that you will not seek or be entitled to injunctive relief.
In any such lawsuit, you must show that we knowingly and intentionally copied your Licensed Work. Access and substantial similarity will not be enough to prove a breach of this Section 3.
WHAT WE OWN. We own Our Licensed Content and reserve all rights not expressly granted in this license.
YOU CONTROL YOUR CONTENT. You can make your Content available under any terms you choose but you may not change the terms under which we make Our Licensed Content available.
You must clearly indicate that your Licensed Work contains Our Licensed Content under this license either by including the full text of this license in your Licensed Work or by applying the Creator Products badge in compliance with the then-current style guidelines.
You may permit the use of your Content on any terms you want. However, if any license you offer to your Licensed Work is different from the terms of this license, you must include in the Licensed Work the attribution for Our Licensed Content found in the preamble to the applicable SRD, and make clear that Our Licensed Content included in your Licensed Work is made available on the terms of this license.
WARRANTIES AND DISCLAIMERS. You represent and warrant that:
Age and Capacity to Be Bound. You are over the age of majority or, if younger, have had your parent or guardian review these terms and agree to them on your behalf.
Authority. You have the power and authority to enter into this license and perform its obligations.
No Infringement. Your Licensed Works do not and will not infringe any third party’s intellectual property rights or any of our rights not licensed to you via this license or any other.
No Endorsement. Except as otherwise expressly allowed by this license, you will not state, suggest, or imply that Your Licensed Works are endorsed by or associated with us.
No Illegal Conduct. You will not violate the law in any way relating to this license or Your Licensed Works.
No Hateful Content or Conduct. You will not include content in Your Licensed Works that is harmful, discriminatory, illegal, obscene, or harassing, or engage in conduct that is harmful, discriminatory, illegal, obscene, or harassing. We have the sole right to decide what conduct or content is hateful, and you covenant that you will not contest any such determination via any suit or other legal action.
MODIFICATION OR TERMINATION
We may only modify the provisions of this license identifying the attribution required under Section 5 and the notice provision of Section 9(a). We may not modify any other provision.
Termination
We may immediately terminate your license if you infringe any of our intellectual property; bring an action challenging our ownership of Our Licensed Content, trademarks, or patents; violate any law in relation to your activities under this license; or violate Section 6(f).
We may terminate your license if you breach any other term in this license, and do not cure that breach within 30 days of notice to you of the breach.
DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES AND LIMITATION OF LIABILITY. YOU UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT WE ARE PROVIDING THE LICENSED CONTENT “AS IS” AND MAKE NO REPRESENTATION OR WARRANTY OF ANY KIND CONCERNING YOUR USE OF THE LICENSED CONTENT EXCEPT AS EXPRESSLY STATED IN THIS LICENSE. WE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS, IMPLIED, STATUTORY OR OTHERWISE. YOU BEAR ALL RISK OF USING THE LICENSED CONTENT AND SUCH USE IS SOLELY AT YOUR OWN DISCRETION AND RISK. We have no liability to you for any types of damages in connection with your use of Our Licensed Content including without limitation any indirect, consequential, special, punitive, or exemplary damages, so long as our conduct at issue was not grossly negligent or intentional.
MISCELLANEOUS
We may notify you by any email or physical address we can locate for you. Only if we cannot locate your email or physical address after a reasonable search, notice via a public channel is sufficient. You may provide notice to us of your email or physical address, or any other notice, by emailing oglnotices@wizards.com.
Entire Agreement and Disclaimer of Reliance. This license governs your use of Our Licensed Content. This license consists only of the terms expressly included herein, and not any matter not expressly included herein. In accepting this license, you represent and warrant to us that you have relied only on the terms of the license and the advice of your own counsel, if any; you have not relied on anything that is not expressly a part of this license.
No Waiver of Rights. If we fail to exercise any right we have under this license, that failure will not prevent us from exercising that right in the future.
If any part of this license is held to be unenforceable or invalid for any reason, Wizards may declare the entire license void, either as between it and the party that obtained the ruling or in its entirety. Unless Wizards elects to do so, the balance of this license will be enforced as if that part which is unenforceable or invalid did not exist.
Governing Law/Jurisdiction/Class Action Waiver. This license and all matters relating to its interpretation and enforcement will be governed by the laws of the State of Washington, and any disputes arising out of or relating to this license will be resolved solely and exclusively through individual litigation in the state or federal courts located in the county in which Wizards (or any successor) has its headquarters, and the parties expressly consent to the jurisdiction of such courts. Each party hereto irrevocably waives the right to participate in any class, collective, or other joint action with respect to such a dispute.
Headings and Footnotes. The headings and footnotes contained in this license are for reference purposes only and shall not affect in any way the meaning or interpretation of this license.
Waiver of Jury Trial. We and you each waive any right to a jury trial of any dispute, claim or cause of action related to or arising out of this license.
Review by Counsel. You should seek advice of counsel to make sure you understand this license. You agree that you had the opportunity to do so.
Wizards of the Coast LLC - Virtual Tabletop Policy Version 1.0
As gamers and big fans of VTTs, we are announcing this new VTT Policy as part of the rollout of OGL 1.2.
Why does Wizards need a VTT Policy?
We support the role VTTs play in the tabletop space. The ability to game remotely means more people can game, and it’s wonderful that people thousands of miles apart can share a space as though sitting around a table. But as VTTs advance, their functionality will raise tricky questions. Where is the line between a VTT and a video game? When does a VTT become more than just a replacement for the traditional tabletop? Those questions require thoughtful answers.
Answering them will take time, and we want this policy to reflect your input. So we’ll be asking for feedback and talking to you about our goals as that discussion advances and new technology emerges.
What is permitted under this policy?
Using VTTs to replicate the experience of sitting around the table playing D&D with your friends.
So displaying static SRD content is just fine because it’s just like looking in a sourcebook. You can put the text of Magic Missile up in your VTT and use it to calculate and apply damage to your target. And automating Magic Missile’s damage to replace manually rolling and calculating is also fine. The VTT can apply Magic Missile’s 1d4+1 damage automatically to your target’s hit points. You do not have to manually calculate and track the damage.
What isn’t permitted are features that don’t replicate your dining room table storytelling. If you replace your imagination with an animation of the Magic Missile streaking across the board to strike your target, or your VTT integrates our content into an NFT, that’s not the tabletop experience. That’s more like a video game.
May I make my VTT Owlbear token look like the one from the Monster Manual?
No. We’ve never licensed visual depictions of our content under the OGL, just the text of the SRD. That hasn’t changed. You can create a creature called an Owlbear with the stat block from the SRD. You cannot copy any of our Owlbear depictions. But if you’ve drawn your own unique Owlbear, or someone else did, you can use it.
What about OGL 1.0a? Does this policy apply to that?
Yes. You can upload your already-licensed content to a VTT.
I own or operate a VTT. How does this affect me?
If you are a VTT owner or operator who supports OGL products on your platform, you have the same obligations for VTT content that any other website owner or operator has for copyrighted content under the DMCA.
You say this is a conversation. Does that mean this policy can change?
Yes! We need your feedback as the tabletop space evolves. The potential of VTTs is tremendous and exciting, and we don’t want to harm their development.
DRAFT: WIZARDS OF THE COAST VTT POLICY
Page 1 of 1
My comments:
Badges: Nice they are bringing back the badges, in the Past the D20 System badge was a separate license, which I do miss. However, I honestly think they should have the badge under a separate license again, one that has many of these changes. Mostly for people who want to live under draconian rules.
Deauthorization of OGL 1.0a: They still want to deauthorize the use of the old license for new content. No. This is unacceptable. What if I want to make stuff 3rd edition based games. What if I want to add stuff for Iron Heroes, Pathfinder 1st, hells bells No. Leave the old SRD's alone. The New OGL should only be for New content. If anything, and this would shift the community view on WotC instantly, give the old rules out as Public Domain. Put 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 3.5, and 4th edition rules up on a free to use never expire agreement, give those out to ORC, work with the community, not against it.
Licensed Content: Your wording deauthorizes any content other than 5.1SRD, meaning the 3rd edition SRD.
Perpetual & irrevocable: Adding the callout words to the agreement you are making, while also making sure you can continue to change the agreement. See section 5 and 9(a) for the loophole.
What you own: Clearly, never in doubt, the issue is the allowance to copy material "by accident" and mitigation of liability. This part is so full of loopholes it would need a Lawyer to explain. Needless to say this part is basically a flowery way to give up rights of what was made to WotC.
What we own: Never in question, WotC has the copyright.
Section 6: a whole lot of duh and a small bit of WTF, no one in the USA is allowed to enter any contract without being legally able to do so, duh, these parts state the obvious and are not needed. Infringement likewise is a duh, making a LotR D&D game and selling it without Tolkien approval is grounds to be sued, something that happened many times to TSR in the early days of D&D, and it is also a duh, but this clause was also in 1.0 so no big.
Section 6(e),6(f): and the WTF, Illegal content is illegal. This goes without saying. But by adding these words, means that WotC can revoke your license even if it's not illegal where you live. Example, you make a "Lesbian Sword Saints" OGL 1.2 game. Well in Russia, China, the Middle East, Most of Africa, And a few parts of the US under Republican Control. Your content is illegal. WotC can revoke your OGL right to publish. Oh and you have a Transgender character, Looks like that is illegal in half of the USA now, oh and the UK is almost there as well. NO. This is terrible wording, and needs to be dropped. Hateful likewise is poorly defined. Say you are making a World War 2 based OGL game, under these words including the national government of 1930s to 1940s Germany would be banned content, including groups of villains who do these things would be rules breaking. Many of the games I run, and will run in the future include an Evil Empire filled with haters who need to be defeated, governments filled with hate makes for a great plot hook, and is something that should not be banned. The nature of these things if included must be spelled out in a way that it is clear we can kill baddie with skulls on their helmets.
Start of the Loopholes:
Section 7: Modification, basically nullifies your perpetual and irrevocable portions of the agreement. Termination basically allows you to stop anyone you disagree with from using the agreement, to include LGBT content if it is found in any place that has made it illegal to be LGBT (Which is basically half the world and half the USA)
Section 8: Basic Disclaimer. "But there is one part that seems troubling. We have no liability to you for any types of damages in connection with your use of Our Licensed Content including without limitation any indirect, consequential, special, punitive, or exemplary damages, so long as our conduct at issue was not grossly negligent or intentional. " the subtext that is not bold. Seems to be a way to pawn off a lawsuit against WotC to a content creator. Say, WotC copies something from a creator who has the right to use something from a copyrighted IP, and WotC gets sued for the use of that IP because it copied it, they can pawn off the damages to the Content Creator who had permission to use the IP. Dangerous wording WotC. Can be used for ill intent.
Section 9: Other things ...
(a) contact info... ok, odd choice, I get it, but really? Sure you may want to get ahold of a creator, and most published material includes contact info, but honestly your inclusion of this actually violates peoples rights. You are saying if you post it publicly it counts as someone being served, for purposes of a lawsuit. No. Just no.
(b) ... kind of a word salad of duh.
(c) Allows WotC to change their minds on any agreement. This is not a good thing to include. Because it means you can send DMCAs to old D20 era books, Pathfinder 1, and other material under the old OGL 1.0a. You know they could even DMCA Monty Cook and games unrelated to the SRD but had made games under the old OGL. Dangerous.
(d) Opps we lost a law suit, so we will remove the OGL completely clause.
(e) Under the Rules of the State of Washington... unless we move to someplace else say China now the community has to follow the Draconian rules of where our new headquarters are. So WotC planning a Move anytime soon, someplace not so consumer friendly? Say Pawtucket, RI? So you can get around possible lawsuits in Washington State?
(f) unnecessary really but sure.
(g) So, no Jury trails... this is anti-customer, I could rant on this, as it's basically a violation of the constitution but legally allowed at times. The inclusion of this clause means no one should ever sign.
(h) You need a lawyer ... agreed, but kind of sus to include in an OGL
And now for the Oh Hell No, WotC you can BLEEP right off with this.
So VTT's are allowed, as long as they are static, and only do math. Tale Spire and Foundry are disallowed from D&D by these rules, and Roll20 is barely legal.
"Using VTTs to replicate the experience of sitting around the table playing D&D with your friends.
So displaying static SRD content is just fine because it’s just like looking in a sourcebook. You can put the text of Magic Missile up in your VTT and use it to calculate and apply damage to your target. And automating Magic Missile’s damage to replace manually rolling and calculating is also fine. The VTT can apply Magic Missile’s 1d4+1 damage automatically to your target’s hit points. You do not have to manually calculate and track the damage.
What isn’t permitted are features that don’t replicate your dining room table storytelling. If you replace your imagination with an animation of the Magic Missile streaking across the board to strike your target,..."
Read that, think what they are saying.
And then, finally, WTF? No VTT uses NFT's and the majority of the Community is actually against the use of NFTs, so why the Hell are you saying: "or your VTT integrates our content into an NFT, that’s not the tabletop experience." Is this what WotC plans with their VTT? This sounds more like an Anti-Competition agreement, and really becomes SUS with the inclusion of NFT language. NO ONE BESIDES HASBRO IS SELLING NFTs!!!!!
next... saying what art can be used in a VTT, this is a bad take, WotC owns a copyright on many things, and owns the rights to their own Art, but if someone makes a BirdBear monster that looks like an Owl with a Bear Body they can totally and legally do it if they make their own art for it. This bit is just saying the VTT agrees to not use any art that resembles any art in D&D. Which means a Wizard with a Pointed Hat can be called a copy of the WotC logo because it superficially looks similar, so WotC can shut down your license.
Then we have a promise by WotC to DMCA VTTs they don't like.
"So displaying static SRD content is just fine because it’s just like looking in a sourcebook. You can put the text of Magic Missile up in your VTT and use it to calculate and apply damage to your target. And automating Magic Missile’s damage to replace manually rolling and calculating is also fine. The VTT can apply Magic Missile’s 1d4+1 damage automatically to your target’s hit points. You do not have to manually calculate and track the damage. What isn’t permitted are features that don’t replicate your dining room table storytelling. If you replace your imagination with an animation of the Magic Missile streaking across the board to strike your target, or your VTT integrates our content into an NFT, that’s not the tabletop experience. That’s more like a video game."
This part. I hate this part.
They're planning on having the DDB VTT do this, and they want to be the only animated VTT in town.
Nice work WOTC - couldn't get your VTT out in time to be competitive so, instead of fixing your internal problems, you try to make it so no one else can create a cool VTT. You sound like a bully. Very disappointing. I'm not buying another WOTC thing ever again - you all suck.
The mere fact that they're still trying to deauthorize the current OGL to force everyone into this new one just rubs me the wrong way. It feels entirely wrong to the entire community, the antithesis of the game.
Like; why shouldn't I be able to put out a 5e adventure a year from now under the current OGL? Why would that hurt them, or One D&D? I'd be using the rules that every other third party publisher has used for the last 20 years, and it hasn't had any giant issues as far as I'm aware...
So why?
All I see is them trying to ensure that third party content creators -cannot- make money anymore on 5e content. They tried tricking them into signing the horrible new OGL under a time crunch, it blew up in their face, and now they'll settle for the second prize which is getting everyone to be okay with them making it impossible for those same content creators to make new content going forward. Like... ???? I'm not cool with that???
So for starters - it shouldn't matter, the point stands regardless if I, personally, have or haven't.
But since you asked; yeah actually I am working on an 80's Mall D&D campaign that I had planned on releasing this summer with the OGL. Would have been my first one, and I've tabled with people who have used the OGL for other projects so I do know folks who this personally impacts and will impact going forward because their businesse are built on D&D products whereas mine are not - but now with all that's going down my entire schedule is shot. I either have to rush to finish everything right now and get it in under the wire, which I don't have time to do right now because my wife literally had surgery three days ago and I'm taking care of her and the house and our business - or I can just kiss the whole project goodbye, and all the maps, guides, character art, icons, puzzles and work I've already put into it is just... kaput. Well I can offer it for free I guess, but I'm SOL if I want to sell it.
So does that answer your question? Do I have a valid enough reason in your eyes to be annoyed at the idea that no one can make 5e content going forward? Because it seems like a pretty reasonable thing to be annoyed with - like even if you take my personal story out of it, it means that we get no new adventures going forward. Nothing from third party creators of any stripe. Is that really what you want?
Sure you can say that 1.0a is Perpetual, but 1.2 is pretty much similar. Having the Royalty removed and having their IP stolen was the key point.
I do have a little issue with 6f but you know what...the content that i want to do as a GM with my players is my own to do. Now if they want to prevent harmful, discriminatory, illegal, obscene, or harassing from official 3rd party content. Maybe it isn't that much of a big deal.... When you start googling the exact meaning of harmful content ...etc....it doesn't feel as bad as i though. Even illegal content. I doubt they mean firearms or abortion but more like child abuse, hate speech and others as this is what comes up if you google What is illegal content. Coming up with a list (as a guide line) for the content creators would be better
Here is my opinion, and while not being a lawyer, I have had 3 years of business law classes including intellectual property and contract law.
Under section 3, they say it is possible they will come up with similar content. This is fine and the normal course of action in cases like this is to contact the creator to get permission to use those elements in their works.
This does not indicate they will try to do that. Instead it says if they have similar, or it could be exactly the same, content, they only recourse someone has is to sue them and accept a monetary payment. You cannot stop them from continuing to use the content.
Essentially, if they so choose, they can use anyone's content and in the end, pay a few dollars for it.
Any and everything else written or said about this does not matter, this is written to allow them this option.
With regard to the racial, discriminatory, etc. content, this gives WOTC unilateral control in determining what constitutes this content. While this may need to be flexible going forward, allowing someone that much control over your content is never a good idea. According to this document, they would have the option to cancel your use of the license saying there is discriminatory content, never tell you what it is, and legally use the rest of your content without ever giving you credit.
I am not saying any of these things will happen, however, if this becomes their OGL, the option is there.
After being in business for 15 years, being a CEO for a small group of companies, and dealing with corporations, along with watching the investor's call from November or December, things have to be watched closely as increasing profits is the driving force behind any changes at this time.
The sales and profit reduction are a simple fix, although their goals need to be much lower and need to realize it was to be expected after the abnormal surges the last three years. However, beginning by making changes which deteriorate the trust of your most loyal customers is the wrong path to follow.
So for starters - it shouldn't matter, the point stands regardless if I, personally, have or haven't.
But since you asked; yeah actually I am working on an 80's Mall D&D campaign that I had planned on releasing this summer with the OGL. Would have been my first one, and I've tabled with people who have used the OGL for other projects so I do know folks who this personally impacts and will impact going forward because their businesse are built on D&D products whereas mine are not - but now with all that's going down my entire schedule is shot. I either have to rush to finish everything right now and get it in under the wire, which I don't have time to do right now because my wife literally had surgery three days ago and I'm taking care of her and the house and our business - or I can just kiss the whole project goodbye, and all the maps, guides, character art, icons, puzzles and work I've already put into it is just... kaput. Well I can offer it for free I guess, but I'm SOL if I want to sell it.
So does that answer your question? Do I have a valid enough reason in your eyes to be annoyed at the idea that no one can make 5e content going forward? Because it seems like a pretty reasonable thing to be annoyed with - like even if you take my personal story out of it, it means that we get no new adventures going forward. Nothing from third party creators of any stripe. Is that really what you want?
(Obligatory I am not a lawyer) Are you actually using something from SRD that would require you to use OGL at all?
So for starters - it shouldn't matter, the point stands regardless if I, personally, have or haven't.
But since you asked; yeah actually I am working on an 80's Mall D&D campaign that I had planned on releasing this summer with the OGL. Would have been my first one, and I've tabled with people who have used the OGL for other projects so I do know folks who this personally impacts and will impact going forward because their businesse are built on D&D products whereas mine are not - but now with all that's going down my entire schedule is shot. I either have to rush to finish everything right now and get it in under the wire, which I don't have time to do right now because my wife literally had surgery three days ago and I'm taking care of her and the house and our business - or I can just kiss the whole project goodbye, and all the maps, guides, character art, icons, puzzles and work I've already put into it is just... kaput. Well I can offer it for free I guess, but I'm SOL if I want to sell it.
So does that answer your question? Do I have a valid enough reason in your eyes to be annoyed at the idea that no one can make 5e content going forward? Because it seems like a pretty reasonable thing to be annoyed with - like even if you take my personal story out of it, it means that we get no new adventures going forward. Nothing from third party creators of any stripe. Is that really what you want?
So what is it, what you wouldn't get under 1.2? Access to 3.0 or 3.5 content? Access to other OGL 1.1(a) 3pp content? You know, if you say what you need, there might be an opportunity now, to get that in.
However, most of the time people just say: NO, 1.1(a) stays, without ever explaining why that is such a big deal.
Everything that I've made thus far has been geared specifically towards D&D 5e, including a Dungeon Master handout and character creation guide with classes and other kinds of things that are indeed specific to Dungeons and Dragons. So yeah, I would need the OGL.
And again, none of what you're asking addresses the larger issue;
Are you really fine with WotC feeling that they have the right to force third party publishers to stop making content for 5e?
Here is my opinion, and while not being a lawyer, I have had 3 years of business law classes including intellectual property and contract law.
Under section 3, they say it is possible they will come up with similar content. This is fine and the normal course of action in cases like this is to contact the creator to get permission to use those elements in their works.
This does not indicate they will try to do that. Instead it says if they have similar, or it could be exactly the same, content, they only recourse someone has is to sue them and accept a monetary payment. You cannot stop them from continuing to use the content.
Essentially, if they so choose, they can use anyone's content and in the end, pay a few dollars for it.
Any and everything else written or said about this does not matter, this is written to allow them this option.
With regard to the racial, discriminatory, etc. content, this gives WOTC unilateral control in determining what constitutes this content. While this may need to be flexible going forward, allowing someone that much control over your content is never a good idea. According to this document, they would have the option to cancel your use of the license saying there is discriminatory content, never tell you what it is, and legally use the rest of your content without ever giving you credit.
I am not saying any of these things will happen, however, if this becomes their OGL, the option is there.
After being in business for 15 years, being a CEO for a small group of companies, and dealing with corporations, along with watching the investor's call from November or December, things have to be watched closely as increasing profits is the driving force behind any changes at this time.
The sales and profit reduction are a simple fix, although their goals need to be much lower and need to realize it was to be expected after the abnormal surges the last three years. However, beginning by making changes which deteriorate the trust of your most loyal customers is the wrong path to follow.
Incorrect. They only deny “injunctive relief”. That means you cannot stop them from publishing it while it is in dispute or after. You could still, theoretically, be awarded 100% of the the profits of it with punative damages.
If you get a monetary settlement making it a loss, they are not going to sell it
So for starters - it shouldn't matter, the point stands regardless if I, personally, have or haven't.
But since you asked; yeah actually I am working on an 80's Mall D&D campaign that I had planned on releasing this summer with the OGL. Would have been my first one, and I've tabled with people who have used the OGL for other projects so I do know folks who this personally impacts and will impact going forward because their businesse are built on D&D products whereas mine are not - but now with all that's going down my entire schedule is shot. I either have to rush to finish everything right now and get it in under the wire, which I don't have time to do right now because my wife literally had surgery three days ago and I'm taking care of her and the house and our business - or I can just kiss the whole project goodbye, and all the maps, guides, character art, icons, puzzles and work I've already put into it is just... kaput. Well I can offer it for free I guess, but I'm SOL if I want to sell it.
So does that answer your question? Do I have a valid enough reason in your eyes to be annoyed at the idea that no one can make 5e content going forward? Because it seems like a pretty reasonable thing to be annoyed with - like even if you take my personal story out of it, it means that we get no new adventures going forward. Nothing from third party creators of any stripe. Is that really what you want?
No, you don’t in my eyes. You didn’t pay the developer. You didn’t pay the play testing. You didn’t pay for all the marketing of 5E. You didn’t pay for the capital infrastructure for the development of the game. You just got VERY generous terms.You get to benefit from all that and it costs you not one cent.
don’t like it? No one is holding a gun to your head to use this version of the system. Don’t like it? Develop your own. Rewrite the entire system in your own words and with your own phrasing.
If you think that that is legally binding and prevents IP infringement and copyright (and TM) laws, then there is a line of people with NDAs and non compete clauses waiting for your precedent in that.
and irrevocable (meaning that content licensed under this license can never be withdrawn from the license).
This wording feels weird and very very specific.
Do they mean "Hey we cant ever take this license back?"
Or do they mean "You cant ever withdraw content you make from this license, everything you make will in perpetuity need to work with us and subsequent versions of this contract"
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I personally hate the direction WotC is going, but in good faith I will leave my Feed Back Here, since the Official Feedback is not Yet Up.
Going to Copy and Paste The OGL 1.2 directly here, and then Comment afterwards.
My comments:
Badges: Nice they are bringing back the badges, in the Past the D20 System badge was a separate license, which I do miss. However, I honestly think they should have the badge under a separate license again, one that has many of these changes. Mostly for people who want to live under draconian rules.
Deauthorization of OGL 1.0a: They still want to deauthorize the use of the old license for new content. No. This is unacceptable. What if I want to make stuff 3rd edition based games. What if I want to add stuff for Iron Heroes, Pathfinder 1st, hells bells No. Leave the old SRD's alone. The New OGL should only be for New content. If anything, and this would shift the community view on WotC instantly, give the old rules out as Public Domain. Put 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 3.5, and 4th edition rules up on a free to use never expire agreement, give those out to ORC, work with the community, not against it.
Licensed Content: Your wording deauthorizes any content other than 5.1SRD, meaning the 3rd edition SRD.
Perpetual & irrevocable: Adding the callout words to the agreement you are making, while also making sure you can continue to change the agreement. See section 5 and 9(a) for the loophole.
What you own: Clearly, never in doubt, the issue is the allowance to copy material "by accident" and mitigation of liability. This part is so full of loopholes it would need a Lawyer to explain. Needless to say this part is basically a flowery way to give up rights of what was made to WotC.
What we own: Never in question, WotC has the copyright.
Section 6: a whole lot of duh and a small bit of WTF, no one in the USA is allowed to enter any contract without being legally able to do so, duh, these parts state the obvious and are not needed. Infringement likewise is a duh, making a LotR D&D game and selling it without Tolkien approval is grounds to be sued, something that happened many times to TSR in the early days of D&D, and it is also a duh, but this clause was also in 1.0 so no big.
Section 6(e),6(f): and the WTF, Illegal content is illegal. This goes without saying. But by adding these words, means that WotC can revoke your license even if it's not illegal where you live. Example, you make a "Lesbian Sword Saints" OGL 1.2 game. Well in Russia, China, the Middle East, Most of Africa, And a few parts of the US under Republican Control. Your content is illegal. WotC can revoke your OGL right to publish. Oh and you have a Transgender character, Looks like that is illegal in half of the USA now, oh and the UK is almost there as well. NO. This is terrible wording, and needs to be dropped. Hateful likewise is poorly defined. Say you are making a World War 2 based OGL game, under these words including the national government of 1930s to 1940s Germany would be banned content, including groups of villains who do these things would be rules breaking. Many of the games I run, and will run in the future include an Evil Empire filled with haters who need to be defeated, governments filled with hate makes for a great plot hook, and is something that should not be banned. The nature of these things if included must be spelled out in a way that it is clear we can kill baddie with skulls on their helmets.
Start of the Loopholes:
Section 7: Modification, basically nullifies your perpetual and irrevocable portions of the agreement. Termination basically allows you to stop anyone you disagree with from using the agreement, to include LGBT content if it is found in any place that has made it illegal to be LGBT (Which is basically half the world and half the USA)
Section 8: Basic Disclaimer. "But there is one part that seems troubling. We have no liability to you for any types of damages in connection with your use of Our Licensed Content including without limitation any indirect, consequential, special, punitive, or exemplary damages, so long as our conduct at issue was not grossly negligent or intentional. " the subtext that is not bold. Seems to be a way to pawn off a lawsuit against WotC to a content creator. Say, WotC copies something from a creator who has the right to use something from a copyrighted IP, and WotC gets sued for the use of that IP because it copied it, they can pawn off the damages to the Content Creator who had permission to use the IP. Dangerous wording WotC. Can be used for ill intent.
Section 9: Other things ...
(a) contact info... ok, odd choice, I get it, but really? Sure you may want to get ahold of a creator, and most published material includes contact info, but honestly your inclusion of this actually violates peoples rights. You are saying if you post it publicly it counts as someone being served, for purposes of a lawsuit. No. Just no.
(b) ... kind of a word salad of duh.
(c) Allows WotC to change their minds on any agreement. This is not a good thing to include. Because it means you can send DMCAs to old D20 era books, Pathfinder 1, and other material under the old OGL 1.0a. You know they could even DMCA Monty Cook and games unrelated to the SRD but had made games under the old OGL. Dangerous.
(d) Opps we lost a law suit, so we will remove the OGL completely clause.
(e) Under the Rules of the State of Washington... unless we move to someplace else say China now the community has to follow the Draconian rules of where our new headquarters are. So WotC planning a Move anytime soon, someplace not so consumer friendly? Say Pawtucket, RI? So you can get around possible lawsuits in Washington State?
(f) unnecessary really but sure.
(g) So, no Jury trails... this is anti-customer, I could rant on this, as it's basically a violation of the constitution but legally allowed at times. The inclusion of this clause means no one should ever sign.
(h) You need a lawyer ... agreed, but kind of sus to include in an OGL
And now for the Oh Hell No, WotC you can BLEEP right off with this.
So VTT's are allowed, as long as they are static, and only do math. Tale Spire and Foundry are disallowed from D&D by these rules, and Roll20 is barely legal.
Read that, think what they are saying.
And then, finally, WTF? No VTT uses NFT's and the majority of the Community is actually against the use of NFTs, so why the Hell are you saying: "or your VTT integrates our content into an NFT, that’s not the tabletop experience." Is this what WotC plans with their VTT? This sounds more like an Anti-Competition agreement, and really becomes SUS with the inclusion of NFT language. NO ONE BESIDES HASBRO IS SELLING NFTs!!!!!
next... saying what art can be used in a VTT, this is a bad take, WotC owns a copyright on many things, and owns the rights to their own Art, but if someone makes a BirdBear monster that looks like an Owl with a Bear Body they can totally and legally do it if they make their own art for it. This bit is just saying the VTT agrees to not use any art that resembles any art in D&D. Which means a Wizard with a Pointed Hat can be called a copy of the WotC logo because it superficially looks similar, so WotC can shut down your license.
Then we have a promise by WotC to DMCA VTTs they don't like.
This part. I hate this part.
They're planning on having the DDB VTT do this, and they want to be the only animated VTT in town.
Since they can change it any way they want later. Still moving away from WOTC. Others are actually creating stuff I want not actively destroying it.
Fantasy Grounds: Ultimate License
D&D 5th
Dungeon Master
Revoking 1.0a is a hard no.
Nice work WOTC - couldn't get your VTT out in time to be competitive so, instead of fixing your internal problems, you try to make it so no one else can create a cool VTT. You sound like a bully. Very disappointing. I'm not buying another WOTC thing ever again - you all suck.
The mere fact that they're still trying to deauthorize the current OGL to force everyone into this new one just rubs me the wrong way. It feels entirely wrong to the entire community, the antithesis of the game.
Like; why shouldn't I be able to put out a 5e adventure a year from now under the current OGL? Why would that hurt them, or One D&D? I'd be using the rules that every other third party publisher has used for the last 20 years, and it hasn't had any giant issues as far as I'm aware...
So why?
All I see is them trying to ensure that third party content creators -cannot- make money anymore on 5e content. They tried tricking them into signing the horrible new OGL under a time crunch, it blew up in their face, and now they'll settle for the second prize which is getting everyone to be okay with them making it impossible for those same content creators to make new content going forward. Like... ???? I'm not cool with that???
Have you ever published under the OGL 1.0a? Do you plan to?
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
So for starters - it shouldn't matter, the point stands regardless if I, personally, have or haven't.
But since you asked; yeah actually I am working on an 80's Mall D&D campaign that I had planned on releasing this summer with the OGL. Would have been my first one, and I've tabled with people who have used the OGL for other projects so I do know folks who this personally impacts and will impact going forward because their businesse are built on D&D products whereas mine are not - but now with all that's going down my entire schedule is shot. I either have to rush to finish everything right now and get it in under the wire, which I don't have time to do right now because my wife literally had surgery three days ago and I'm taking care of her and the house and our business - or I can just kiss the whole project goodbye, and all the maps, guides, character art, icons, puzzles and work I've already put into it is just... kaput. Well I can offer it for free I guess, but I'm SOL if I want to sell it.
So does that answer your question? Do I have a valid enough reason in your eyes to be annoyed at the idea that no one can make 5e content going forward? Because it seems like a pretty reasonable thing to be annoyed with - like even if you take my personal story out of it, it means that we get no new adventures going forward. Nothing from third party creators of any stripe. Is that really what you want?
I think over all it is good.
Sure you can say that 1.0a is Perpetual, but 1.2 is pretty much similar. Having the Royalty removed and having their IP stolen was the key point.
I do have a little issue with 6f but you know what...the content that i want to do as a GM with my players is my own to do. Now if they want to prevent harmful, discriminatory, illegal, obscene, or harassing from official 3rd party content. Maybe it isn't that much of a big deal.... When you start googling the exact meaning of harmful content ...etc....it doesn't feel as bad as i though. Even illegal content. I doubt they mean firearms or abortion but more like child abuse, hate speech and others as this is what comes up if you google What is illegal content. Coming up with a list (as a guide line) for the content creators would be better
Here is my opinion, and while not being a lawyer, I have had 3 years of business law classes including intellectual property and contract law.
Under section 3, they say it is possible they will come up with similar content. This is fine and the normal course of action in cases like this is to contact the creator to get permission to use those elements in their works.
This does not indicate they will try to do that. Instead it says if they have similar, or it could be exactly the same, content, they only recourse someone has is to sue them and accept a monetary payment. You cannot stop them from continuing to use the content.
Essentially, if they so choose, they can use anyone's content and in the end, pay a few dollars for it.
Any and everything else written or said about this does not matter, this is written to allow them this option.
With regard to the racial, discriminatory, etc. content, this gives WOTC unilateral control in determining what constitutes this content. While this may need to be flexible going forward, allowing someone that much control over your content is never a good idea. According to this document, they would have the option to cancel your use of the license saying there is discriminatory content, never tell you what it is, and legally use the rest of your content without ever giving you credit.
I am not saying any of these things will happen, however, if this becomes their OGL, the option is there.
After being in business for 15 years, being a CEO for a small group of companies, and dealing with corporations, along with watching the investor's call from November or December, things have to be watched closely as increasing profits is the driving force behind any changes at this time.
The sales and profit reduction are a simple fix, although their goals need to be much lower and need to realize it was to be expected after the abnormal surges the last three years. However, beginning by making changes which deteriorate the trust of your most loyal customers is the wrong path to follow.
(Obligatory I am not a lawyer) Are you actually using something from SRD that would require you to use OGL at all?
So what is it, what you wouldn't get under 1.2? Access to 3.0 or 3.5 content? Access to other OGL 1.1(a) 3pp content? You know, if you say what you need, there might be an opportunity now, to get that in.
However, most of the time people just say: NO, 1.1(a) stays, without ever explaining why that is such a big deal.
Everything that I've made thus far has been geared specifically towards D&D 5e, including a Dungeon Master handout and character creation guide with classes and other kinds of things that are indeed specific to Dungeons and Dragons. So yeah, I would need the OGL.
And again, none of what you're asking addresses the larger issue;
Are you really fine with WotC feeling that they have the right to force third party publishers to stop making content for 5e?
Incorrect. They only deny “injunctive relief”. That means you cannot stop them from publishing it while it is in dispute or after. You could still, theoretically, be awarded 100% of the the profits of it with punative damages.
If you get a monetary settlement making it a loss, they are not going to sell it
No, you don’t in my eyes. You didn’t pay the developer. You didn’t pay the play testing. You didn’t pay for all the marketing of 5E. You didn’t pay for the capital infrastructure for the development of the game. You just got VERY generous terms.You get to benefit from all that and it costs you not one cent.
don’t like it? No one is holding a gun to your head to use this version of the system. Don’t like it? Develop your own. Rewrite the entire system in your own words and with your own phrasing.
If you think that that is legally binding and prevents IP infringement and copyright (and TM) laws, then there is a line of people with NDAs and non compete clauses waiting for your precedent in that.
Yes, and not again.
This wording feels weird and very very specific.
Do they mean "Hey we cant ever take this license back?"
Or do they mean "You cant ever withdraw content you make from this license, everything you make will in perpetuity need to work with us and subsequent versions of this contract"