Spinward Flow
SOC-14 5K
If anything, it's really just the motivation needed to
Could always go back to D6s you know ...
The Upcoming New OGL 1.1 vs. OGL 1.0a and Cepheus
- Thread starter Nathan Brazil
- Start date
Could always go back to D6s you know ...
FINALLY!
I got a copy of the leaked draft. This is the non-Commericial license draft, implying there is Commericial license being worked on also
On page 5:
I got a copy of the leaked draft. This is the non-Commericial license draft, implying there is Commericial license being worked on also
On page 5:
Actually, I have had the opportunity to look at the whole (alleged) OGL 1.1 now, and one thing that I noticed immediately is that 1.1 covers only content in the SRD 5.1 - i.e. 5E, and soon to be 6E content or in still other words what you might describe as current D&D. Not past versions.
This can mean one of two things (well, legally it can at most mean one, but I am talking about WotC's intentions here):
a.) Either they don't care about previous works making use of pre-5th edition open content the OGL 1.0a, like Pathfinder 1e or T20. Possibly because they recognize that ship has sailed and it would be hopeless to go for...
b.) ... an attempt by WotC to retroactively remove the open content from the OGL 1.0(a) SRDs (3.0, 3.5, D20 modern IIRC) published by them and place them back into the category of "unlicensed content" as 1.1 puts it.
We'll see. Even getting away with a.) seems to be dubious proposition to me, but b.) would be downright insane. I'm guessing b.) is their goal.
Not really. WotC owning the copyright to the license text has no bearing on its legal effect. They could theoretically use their copyright to keep you from using the 1.0a as a license for your own content in the future by denying you the ability to reproduce its text, but nothing in 1.1 does so.
Also, nothing in this license or any other license will give WotC the ability to make any claims on content (such as Cepheus) that never made use of any of WotC's IP to begin with.
VTTs, especially those heavily interwoven with D&D content, may suffer.
Then again, in that sector, software, there are some other companies who made OGL-based video games. Including that one very popular sci-fi game that is scheduled for a remake.
I'm trying to remember, something with knights... and a republic. It was based on this really popular sci-fi franchise by some guy who sold it all to some other entertainment company a couple of years ago.
Now trying to remember the name of the new company. Started with a "D" I think. And ISTR, even if this sounds weird, they have some sort of mouse as a symbol. Anyhow, sure doesn't sound like the sort of company with the legal team and staying power to take on a giant such as Hasbro. Right?
MichaelSTee
SOC-12
But, CE did use some text from T20, which had text derived from D20. Has anyone ever determined exactly what text came from T20?
Spinward Flow
SOC-14 5K
More reporting ...
It has been brought to my attention that Disney in fact had a separate "perpetual" license to the D20 SWRPG granted by WotC (in exchange for the license to make the RPG in the first place.) Too bad.
Hairy Jim DeGriz
SOC-12
"Official" WoTC comments Where they discuss their business logic.
Reporting that is not people blah blah blah on video, but blah blah blah in text. Gizmodo
I understand (don't agree with) Hasboro's point - there are about 20 companies making "real" money off the OGL and WoTC believes they deserve a cut, and hell WoTC never thought there would be VTTs, since they're not really good at technology, so they need to get a piece of those pies too.
Here's what I see as the carrot and the stick.
If you're an independent D&D module publisher, and your existing catalogue was published under OGL 1.0. - All 10 years of your creative endeavors... WoTC can't force you to change to OGL 1.1. But if you want to publish anything in the future, you will need to use OGL 1.1 for all future and retroactively for existing product in your catalogue. You get to keep making money on your new and old products and you will share it with WoTC. Or become an archive with no new material. WoTC won't (can't?) force any publisher to change to OGL 1.1, the publisher will need to agree to it for mutual benefit.
Just a thought, not an attorney.
As for how that affects Cepheus and Independence Games, I can't opine. I'm not sure how a legal contract can be copyrighted, since lawyers copy each other's contracts all of the time and revise them, and ultimately both parties have to agree to the contract. By publishing under OGL 1.0 both parties have agreed to the terms of the contract as provided.
Now I'm going to watch some blah blah blah video.
Reporting that is not people blah blah blah on video, but blah blah blah in text. Gizmodo
I understand (don't agree with) Hasboro's point - there are about 20 companies making "real" money off the OGL and WoTC believes they deserve a cut, and hell WoTC never thought there would be VTTs, since they're not really good at technology, so they need to get a piece of those pies too.
Here's what I see as the carrot and the stick.
If you're an independent D&D module publisher, and your existing catalogue was published under OGL 1.0. - All 10 years of your creative endeavors... WoTC can't force you to change to OGL 1.1. But if you want to publish anything in the future, you will need to use OGL 1.1 for all future and retroactively for existing product in your catalogue. You get to keep making money on your new and old products and you will share it with WoTC. Or become an archive with no new material. WoTC won't (can't?) force any publisher to change to OGL 1.1, the publisher will need to agree to it for mutual benefit.
Just a thought, not an attorney.
As for how that affects Cepheus and Independence Games, I can't opine. I'm not sure how a legal contract can be copyrighted, since lawyers copy each other's contracts all of the time and revise them, and ultimately both parties have to agree to the contract. By publishing under OGL 1.0 both parties have agreed to the terms of the contract as provided.
Now I'm going to watch some blah blah blah video.
Hairy Jim DeGriz
SOC-12
Here's a lawyer blah blah blahing (with bad audio) and it's boring, but interesting... as law generally is.
RollForCombat.com with a real Lawyer
RollForCombat.com with a real Lawyer
Hey everyone,
Rumour Control (sort of).
First off, no one really knows anything at the moment, and nothing seems finalised. Would advise not panicking until then.
Second, if (if) WotC is able to and does nuke the original OGL, I can see that this would cause issues for Cepheus. There are possibly things that could be done to plonk WotC around on this, but I cannot see that it would be fruitful, and could be expensive.
All that said...
If the Cepheus publishers would like to get in touch with me directly (msprange@mongoosepublishing.com), we are more than happy to discuss other possible arrangements. We have no wish for any of the Cepheus publishers to get wounded or flattened by this, and we might be able to sort something out that is beneficial to all.
Might be useful to have a round table on this and see what is what.
Rumour Control (sort of).
First off, no one really knows anything at the moment, and nothing seems finalised. Would advise not panicking until then.
Second, if (if) WotC is able to and does nuke the original OGL, I can see that this would cause issues for Cepheus. There are possibly things that could be done to plonk WotC around on this, but I cannot see that it would be fruitful, and could be expensive.
All that said...
If the Cepheus publishers would like to get in touch with me directly (msprange@mongoosepublishing.com), we are more than happy to discuss other possible arrangements. We have no wish for any of the Cepheus publishers to get wounded or flattened by this, and we might be able to sort something out that is beneficial to all.
Might be useful to have a round table on this and see what is what.
Spinward Flow
SOC-14 5K
PANIC NOW ... no.
START PREPARING NOW for a change of business plans moving forward ... you're going to need to build your escape hatch before you can use it.
Everyone has until the end of 2023 to get their business affairs in order.
I fully expect the community that
OGL 1.1 is targeting so rapaciously are going to ABANDON SHIP well before the end of 2023 ... and move on to publishing new editions beyond WotC's reach in 2024.After all, it's the perfect excuse for a product line refresh and republish, wouldn't you say?
daryen
SOC-14 1K
IANAL
It would seem to me that, for Cepheus, this is a fairly simple solution. (Not necessarily a *quick* solution, but still a simple one.) As seen above, Mongoose is willing to work with Cepheus. Marc has shown he is willing to work with Cepheus (simply by this topic even existing at all). Therefore, just remove the OGL 1.0a from Cepheus and replace it with something else. Since Traveller is not d20, it shouldn't be that hard to scrub any d20 references from Cepheus and reissue it with another license. I fail to see why this is difficult.
As for why this should be done: WotC has now "shown their colors". Whether their attempt to invalidate the OGL 1.0a is eventually successful or not, they have now shown their intention. It will go away, and they are gunning to put third-party creators out of business. (And, to make it even worse, they want to reserve the right to steal all of their IP, too!) Whether they back off now or not, that is their intention. They can never be trusted again. No matter if the immediate emergency passes or not, it is imperative that Cepheus totally disassociate itself from OGL 1.0a.
Fortunately, that disassociation for Cepheus would appear to be very straight-forward. So, who is the correct party to do this?
It would seem to me that, for Cepheus, this is a fairly simple solution. (Not necessarily a *quick* solution, but still a simple one.) As seen above, Mongoose is willing to work with Cepheus. Marc has shown he is willing to work with Cepheus (simply by this topic even existing at all). Therefore, just remove the OGL 1.0a from Cepheus and replace it with something else. Since Traveller is not d20, it shouldn't be that hard to scrub any d20 references from Cepheus and reissue it with another license. I fail to see why this is difficult.
As for why this should be done: WotC has now "shown their colors". Whether their attempt to invalidate the OGL 1.0a is eventually successful or not, they have now shown their intention. It will go away, and they are gunning to put third-party creators out of business. (And, to make it even worse, they want to reserve the right to steal all of their IP, too!) Whether they back off now or not, that is their intention. They can never be trusted again. No matter if the immediate emergency passes or not, it is imperative that Cepheus totally disassociate itself from OGL 1.0a.
Fortunately, that disassociation for Cepheus would appear to be very straight-forward. So, who is the correct party to do this?
Spinward Flow
SOC-14 5K
More reporting ...
Beware OGL 1.1 (leak) p7 ... Section X, Clauses A and B ...
Sure, you OWN your original content ... but when WotC can just waltz in and make use of it in any way they please for whatever reason and you've already signed away your right to contest that action by WotC, just how much is that "ownership" of your original content worth?
Correct Answer: NOTHING.
Even more reporting ...
The clause saying WotC can alter or revoke the license agreement at any time for any reason, given 30 days notice (ha!), means that WotC can swoop in at any time and say you don't even have any rights to your own content anymore.
Your "ownership" of your original content is provisional in perpetuity and requires WotC to remain ... benevolent.
Yeah, right ... like that's going to happen (f there's money involved) ...
Beware OGL 1.1 (leak) p7 ... Section X, Clauses A and B ...
In other words, OGL 1.1 signs your rights to control away ... letting WotC strip mine your creations FOR FREE ... FOREVER.
Sure, you OWN your original content ... but when WotC can just waltz in and make use of it in any way they please for whatever reason and you've already signed away your right to contest that action by WotC, just how much is that "ownership" of your original content worth?
Correct Answer: NOTHING.
Even more reporting ...
The clause saying WotC can alter or revoke the license agreement at any time for any reason, given 30 days notice (ha!), means that WotC can swoop in at any time and say you don't even have any rights to your own content anymore.
Your "ownership" of your original content is provisional in perpetuity and requires WotC to remain ... benevolent.
Yeah, right ... like that's going to happen (f there's money involved) ...
Last edited:
Thank you Matt for responding. Being the OP on this thread, as I said, I have no shame in being alarmist to defend this game. You never forget your first .... um .... RPG. (Lordy I have no filter
).I had concerns because beyond your old d20 stuff, The "special techniques" in some of your older Traveller products (Judge Dredd and Strontium Dog) used wording that seems identical frankly IMHO, to specific feats in the d20 3.5SRD. And then of course the old Traveller Development Pack documents themselves which Cepheus draws from, released back in 2008, themselves used the OGL 1.0a License even though there is zero d20 content in it.
From your Traveller SRD v1.1.doc file
Last edited:
daryen
SOC-14 1K
First, thank you for posting here. That is very much appreciated.
Second, honestly, the best thing that you/Mongoose can do is to update the SRD without using the OGL. I don't know what you would replace it with (IANAL, so I don't have useful suggestions), and I am not sure if that would require any textual changes to the SRD. But, that all said, the absolute best thing that Mongoose can do to help Cepheus is to reissue the SRD without the OGL. The second best thing is to make sure the new license states it is perpetual AND irrevocable so we don't have to go through this again.
That is my direct request to Mongoose to do for third-party publishers.
Thank you!
Spinward Flow
SOC-14 5K
Does anyone else feel like the opening monologue from War of the Worlds is a pretty decent allegorical fit to the hubris Hasbro/WotC has displayed in the OGL 1.1 debacle that is rapidly unfolding?
Change the dates and the parties involved (19th century, Martians, etc.) ... and it sure sounds a whole lot like the perspective, mentality and thinking going on in corporate offices planning a hostile takeover of a previously supportive and thriving community ... to an almost uncanny degree in parallels.
For what has happened here is that soulless corporate power has looked upon the creative community with envious eyes ... and slowly, and surely ... they drew their plans against us.
Change the dates and the parties involved (19th century, Martians, etc.) ... and it sure sounds a whole lot like the perspective, mentality and thinking going on in corporate offices planning a hostile takeover of a previously supportive and thriving community ... to an almost uncanny degree in parallels.
For what has happened here is that soulless corporate power has looked upon the creative community with envious eyes ... and slowly, and surely ... they drew their plans against us.
Not news, but food for thought and perhaps legal ammo:
In 2019, PhD candidate Giuseppe Roberto Tarantino of York University in Canada wrote a doctoral thesis on OGL 1.0a. He was applying for a PhD in IP Law ! Important for a start because he got his PhD. Admittedly a Canadian law degree, but he focused on its use, applicability, and strengths within US law as well.
Soooo here was his thesis:
If You Love Something, Set it Free? Open Content Copyright Licensing and Creative Cultural Expression
And he was interviewed on a law (non-gaming) YouTube channel last year on its elegance and and how it protected everyone
In 2019, PhD candidate Giuseppe Roberto Tarantino of York University in Canada wrote a doctoral thesis on OGL 1.0a. He was applying for a PhD in IP Law ! Important for a start because he got his PhD. Admittedly a Canadian law degree, but he focused on its use, applicability, and strengths within US law as well.
Soooo here was his thesis:
If You Love Something, Set it Free? Open Content Copyright Licensing and Creative Cultural Expression
And he was interviewed on a law (non-gaming) YouTube channel last year on its elegance and and how it protected everyone
Heh Heh. To answer some of THAT, Ryan Dancy who helped write the 1.0/1.0a License, is being interviewed in 1 hour and 15 minutes on original intentions, and will be asked his speculations on 1.1
Well, Matt is absolutely right. As it stands currently, all of this is speculation.
The leak may or may not be real. The leak may be a trial balloon by WoTC. WoTC may yet see how poorly this is being received. Lots of possibilities.
When/if WoTC makes their move, then we'll have something solid to work around. At that stage, we'll see what needs to be done.
The leak may or may not be real. The leak may be a trial balloon by WoTC. WoTC may yet see how poorly this is being received. Lots of possibilities.
When/if WoTC makes their move, then we'll have something solid to work around. At that stage, we'll see what needs to be done.
Spinward Flow
SOC-14 5K
So ...
Until WotC "makes their move" ... business as usual, nothing to see here?
Whistling past the graveyard full of undead, much?
