5 ms·

Here's another lawyer's take on this situation: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1UgfQ8rydZ7D5LQXRJ6XDKa-_MRMOOlka https://drive.google.com/file/d/1UgfQ8rydZ7D5L

Here's another lawyer's take on this situation: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1UgfQ8rydZ7D5LQXRJ6XDKa-_MRMOOlka https://drive.google.com/file/d/1UgfQ8rydZ7D5LQXRJ6XDKa-_MRM... This letter was sent to Wizards of the Coast yesterday, asking for clarification on the situation within 10 days. The biggest effect from all of this that I can see is that everyone I know that's normally super enthusiastic about creating Dungeons & Dragons content (including myself!) is now deflated, not knowing what they should do about their upcoming projects (that they may have sunk thousands in already).

t-writescode 4y ago
For those of us that don't want to go into another person's Google Drive, could you give a summary of this? (or an alternate source?)
- Y_Y 4y ago
  It's a letter from an affected publisher's lawyer, too long to post verbatim. They say they want to be able to keep publishing stuff under this license, give supporting citations and demand clarification.
  - Semaphor 4y ago
    And they say that if they receive no reply within 10 days, they, as well as other affected parties, will sue Hasbo/WotC
  - bonzini 4y ago
    They don't provide many citations though. They mostly mention that "authorized versions" is not defined in the license and they cite the FAQ (mentioned in the OP as well), hinting that reneging the words of the FAQ would constitute estoppel.
- codetrotter 4y ago
  > alternate source? https://archive.is/EFalu https://archive.is/EFalu
- _v7gu 4y ago
  Here's a chatgpt summary: - Wizards of the Coast announced on December 21, 2022 that a new version of the Open Gaming License (OGL) would be released, causing confusion in the gaming community. - The letter writer, who represents Sad Fishe Games and Prudence Holdings, has tried to contact Wizards of the Coast through various channels to seek clarification, but has not received a response. - There are rumors that the new 1.1 version of the OGL will restrict the use of the 1.0a version and require contributors to share financial data and potentially pay a royalty to Wizards of the Coast for the use of OGL content. - The letter writer argues that the 1.0a version of the OGL cannot be revoked and that Wizards of the Coast does not have the authority to terminate the license or force contributors to use the 1.1 version. - The letter writer cites previous statements made by Wizards of the Coast and case law to support this interpretation. - The letter writer requests that Wizards of the Coast provide a more definite statement on the 1.1 version of the OGL and deauthorize any attempt to repudiate the 1.0a version.
  - bovermyer 4y ago
    Because it's ChatGPT, I immediately cannot trust this summary.
    - default_png 4y ago
      Because it's on the Internet I immediately cannot trust this summary.
      - BlueTemplar 4y ago
        You hopefully are aware that ChatGPT results in a quite different category of wrongness ?
        t-writescode 4y ago
        How so? A summary by a random person on the internet *here*, is probably even worse than a summary where ChatGPT was given exactly the content of that text and asked to summarize it. ChatGPT is probably even better than those random Reddit news article summaries that were all the rage for a while.
- timvdalen 4y ago
  Sure, here's a rehosted link: https://timvdalen.nl/files/20230105_VIA_US_MAIL_AND_FASCIMILE__425_271_5215_001_Redacted.pdf https://timvdalen.nl/files/20230105_VIA_US_MAIL_AND_FASCIMIL... Would you mind explaining why you don't want to go into another person's Google Drive? Just Google tracking?
  - wodenokoto 4y ago
    If I'm logged in, suddenly parts of my browsing history becomes part of my drive.
    - mvolfik 4y ago
      Is it too difficult to open a link in an anonymous window, if being logged in is the only concern?
  - BlueTemplar 4y ago
    I don't know for him, but in my case I'm trying to boycott all GAFAM content, so I take it poorly when someone tries to force me to use them (especially when alternatives exist).
  - t-writescode 4y ago
    It's a Google Drive link, so it could very easily be a PDF or docx or anything with executable code; and I avoid reading random PDFs online unless they're provided by a reputable source. I also didn't click the super long link here. And, since it's Google Drive, I don't want to deal with having to open the link in a private browser. For the person saying "isn't it easy just to open it in a private browser?" sure; but it's also friction I don't feel like dealing with, especially since it could easily be a PDF or whatever and my concerns remain.
Kiro 4y ago
Why within 10 days?
- codingdave 4y ago
  They are stating that they intend to force this question in court if they have to, but are going to wait 10 days before filing to give both sides an opportunity to solve it in a simpler way. It is arbitrary, and it really is nothing more than a letter. But it sets expectations on what consequences may arise if they choose not to respond. It is now up to Wizard of the Coast to decide whether and how to respond.
- ogre_battle 4y ago
  * they could have a book going to the publisher (book or website) in a few days * forces the issue, and demands action from WoTC; fairly common * keeps the issue front and center, ensures it is visible for the rest of the community, which means they can act accordingly (instead of it quietly happening behind the scenes, followed by targeted Cease and Desists, settlements, etc.) * only requires a response; Hasboro might be able to buy time, offer an olive branch, etc.
neals 4y ago
What kind of content are people making?
- bonzini 4y ago
  Material for game campaigns; including new settings, monsters, character subclasses, extended rules etc.
  - Scandiravian 4y ago
    Additionally also files for printing 3d minis and VTTs such as foundry, which doesn't come with d&d rulesets out of the box, but relies on community content to support it
    - bonzini 4y ago
      VTT = virtual table top
- timvdalen 4y ago
  I'm personally making adventures. Mostly little 40-page books that allow a group to play to a story. These are OGL-licensed so I can re-print existing SRD monster stat blocks with the adventure for ease of use, but don't really contain anything that could reasonably be called WotC's IP beyond that.
- trynewideas 4y ago
  Here's a whole storefront full of 5E OGL content, not including Hasbro's official Dungeon Master's Guild shop: https://www.drivethrurpg.com/browse.php?filters=45326_0_0_0_0&src=fid45326 https://www.drivethrurpg.com/browse.php?filters=45326_0_0_0_...
- t-writescode 4y ago
  To add another entry, D&D skits are very common on TikTok. Dead Gentleman Productions has made at least 3 D&D inspired (and using) movies, including: - Gamers - Gamers: Dorkness Rising - Gamers: Hand of Fate(??? I didn't see this one, I think that's the title?) And AD&D was used as a major story tenant of Stranger Things.
trynewideas 4y ago
Are they publishing them to the Dungeon Master's Guild? Because if so, the OGL doesn't really matter to them anyway. If they're self-publishing, well, it's a pity everyone forgot what happened with 4E and the GSL.

t-writescode 4y ago

For those of us that don't want to go into another person's Google Drive, could you give a summary of this? (or an alternate source?)

Y_Y 4y ago
It's a letter from an affected publisher's lawyer, too long to post verbatim. They say they want to be able to keep publishing stuff under this license, give supporting citations and demand clarification.
- Semaphor 4y ago
  And they say that if they receive no reply within 10 days, they, as well as other affected parties, will sue Hasbo/WotC
- bonzini 4y ago
  They don't provide many citations though. They mostly mention that "authorized versions" is not defined in the license and they cite the FAQ (mentioned in the OP as well), hinting that reneging the words of the FAQ would constitute estoppel.
codetrotter 4y ago
> alternate source? https://archive.is/EFalu https://archive.is/EFalu
_v7gu 4y ago
Here's a chatgpt summary: - Wizards of the Coast announced on December 21, 2022 that a new version of the Open Gaming License (OGL) would be released, causing confusion in the gaming community. - The letter writer, who represents Sad Fishe Games and Prudence Holdings, has tried to contact Wizards of the Coast through various channels to seek clarification, but has not received a response. - There are rumors that the new 1.1 version of the OGL will restrict the use of the 1.0a version and require contributors to share financial data and potentially pay a royalty to Wizards of the Coast for the use of OGL content. - The letter writer argues that the 1.0a version of the OGL cannot be revoked and that Wizards of the Coast does not have the authority to terminate the license or force contributors to use the 1.1 version. - The letter writer cites previous statements made by Wizards of the Coast and case law to support this interpretation. - The letter writer requests that Wizards of the Coast provide a more definite statement on the 1.1 version of the OGL and deauthorize any attempt to repudiate the 1.0a version.
- bovermyer 4y ago
  Because it's ChatGPT, I immediately cannot trust this summary.
  - default_png 4y ago
    Because it's on the Internet I immediately cannot trust this summary.
    - BlueTemplar 4y ago
      You hopefully are aware that ChatGPT results in a quite different category of wrongness ?
      - t-writescode 4y ago
        How so? A summary by a random person on the internet *here*, is probably even worse than a summary where ChatGPT was given exactly the content of that text and asked to summarize it. ChatGPT is probably even better than those random Reddit news article summaries that were all the rage for a while.
timvdalen 4y ago
Sure, here's a rehosted link: https://timvdalen.nl/files/20230105_VIA_US_MAIL_AND_FASCIMILE__425_271_5215_001_Redacted.pdf https://timvdalen.nl/files/20230105_VIA_US_MAIL_AND_FASCIMIL... Would you mind explaining why you don't want to go into another person's Google Drive? Just Google tracking?
- wodenokoto 4y ago
  If I'm logged in, suddenly parts of my browsing history becomes part of my drive.
  - mvolfik 4y ago
    Is it too difficult to open a link in an anonymous window, if being logged in is the only concern?
- BlueTemplar 4y ago
  I don't know for him, but in my case I'm trying to boycott all GAFAM content, so I take it poorly when someone tries to force me to use them (especially when alternatives exist).
- t-writescode 4y ago
  It's a Google Drive link, so it could very easily be a PDF or docx or anything with executable code; and I avoid reading random PDFs online unless they're provided by a reputable source. I also didn't click the super long link here. And, since it's Google Drive, I don't want to deal with having to open the link in a private browser. For the person saying "isn't it easy just to open it in a private browser?" sure; but it's also friction I don't feel like dealing with, especially since it could easily be a PDF or whatever and my concerns remain.

Kiro 4y ago

Why within 10 days?

codingdave 4y ago
They are stating that they intend to force this question in court if they have to, but are going to wait 10 days before filing to give both sides an opportunity to solve it in a simpler way. It is arbitrary, and it really is nothing more than a letter. But it sets expectations on what consequences may arise if they choose not to respond. It is now up to Wizard of the Coast to decide whether and how to respond.
ogre_battle 4y ago
* they could have a book going to the publisher (book or website) in a few days * forces the issue, and demands action from WoTC; fairly common * keeps the issue front and center, ensures it is visible for the rest of the community, which means they can act accordingly (instead of it quietly happening behind the scenes, followed by targeted Cease and Desists, settlements, etc.) * only requires a response; Hasboro might be able to buy time, offer an olive branch, etc.

neals 4y ago

What kind of content are people making?

bonzini 4y ago
Material for game campaigns; including new settings, monsters, character subclasses, extended rules etc.
- Scandiravian 4y ago
  Additionally also files for printing 3d minis and VTTs such as foundry, which doesn't come with d&d rulesets out of the box, but relies on community content to support it
  - bonzini 4y ago
    VTT = virtual table top
timvdalen 4y ago
I'm personally making adventures. Mostly little 40-page books that allow a group to play to a story. These are OGL-licensed so I can re-print existing SRD monster stat blocks with the adventure for ease of use, but don't really contain anything that could reasonably be called WotC's IP beyond that.
trynewideas 4y ago
Here's a whole storefront full of 5E OGL content, not including Hasbro's official Dungeon Master's Guild shop: https://www.drivethrurpg.com/browse.php?filters=45326_0_0_0_0&src=fid45326 https://www.drivethrurpg.com/browse.php?filters=45326_0_0_0_...
t-writescode 4y ago
To add another entry, D&D skits are very common on TikTok. Dead Gentleman Productions has made at least 3 D&D inspired (and using) movies, including: - Gamers - Gamers: Dorkness Rising - Gamers: Hand of Fate(??? I didn't see this one, I think that's the title?) And AD&D was used as a major story tenant of Stranger Things.

trynewideas 4y ago

Are they publishing them to the Dungeon Master's Guild? Because if so, the OGL doesn't really matter to them anyway. If they're self-publishing, well, it's a pity everyone forgot what happened with 4E and the GSL.