There's been a lot of talk (even among creators with work on GOG) about the "new" leaked OGL from WotC.

It is pretty crazy...

... having to register use of OGL with WotC

... having to share proceeds with WotC over $750,000

... and WotC reserving the right to ownership of your work

Now...

... I'm not a lawyer...

... but I've worked with IPs... and rights issues...

... and...

... I've spent a day or two looking at this situation. My thoughts...

1. Writers of the original OGL are still around and active. They claim the intention of the original OGL was that WotC COULD NOT revoke or change the OGL. And contrary to what some think, intention is usually weighed in contract law.

2. WotC have not contested the original OGL for 2 decades. This sets a precedent for the validity of the original OGL.

It's my opinion that WotC will not legally be able to change the original OGL (and I think they know that) but...

... if they can scare 3rd party creators into signing this new OGL, then the 3rd party creators have given away their rights and have agreed to the terms of this new OGL.

My gut feeling is WotC is trying to scare creators and will try and get them to sign away their rights quickly...

... before they have a chance to read and analyze the entire document...

... and figure out this is all bluster with no legal backing because Hasbro is losing money hand-over-fist.

Whether or not it's bluster is a moot point unless some of the affected parties step up to the plate and sue WOTC over this.

If what they are doing is indeed illegal, then they need to get sued over the matter.

And if they don't get sued, then whether what they are doing is illegal or not makes no practical difference in the real world, because they are still going to do it anyway regardless of how illegal it is.

In my opinion...

... WotC has no right to anything created under the original OGL and cannot change the terms of the original OGL.

Now, will creators give in to their threats, accept the new OGL, and give up their rights? What they are doing is not illegal if creators agree to it.

(and I can guarantee large creators are looking at how expensive this would be to fight)

If a creator agrees to a new contract, then that document becomes the terms of the new contract.

The only way I can see that WotC would be doing something truly illegal was if they were forcing creators to sign the new OGL.

I think they know this... and that's why the new OGL was leaked. It scares many small creators to sign over their rights without legal actions.

Wait, what? What are the broader Hasbro issues? I assume it's not so much the WotC division as D&D is enjoying something of a resurgence - is it because.. traditional family board games are dead?!

Looks like they're blaming covid? I'm really surprised about that, I would have thought sales of toys and games would have soared to keep the kids busy and away from wandering into your Zoom meetings while they were stuck at home?
I mean, didn't Amazon report record profits or something? What were people buying from there if not Hasbro products?

They had a difficult third quarter and they expected as much. It affected all brands and units, some more, some less. Revenue for D&D and MTG had a net revenue drop of -16% and -35% respectively. Hasbro third quarter financial results

The OLG 1.0 and 1.0a was more a gentleman's agreement from what i have heard or understand, specifically if you reference any part of the SRD or copy/paste part of it, they would promise not to try to sue you basically. 'I agree to let you use my stuff at no charge' so long as you don't break the rules.

I'm not a lawyer either, but first the license is out there. It can't be revoked, or refused. The license is something YOU decide on and apply to your works, not something you allow someone else to use, basically it's in the wild (as one lawyer said). Second they can't update or force you to use a particular license. I've heard things go on in software with the GPL 2 vs GPL 3 and other things with Linus and the Linux Kernel, how he didn't like the version 3 so he made it all sources were locked into GPL 2. If you could just 'oh this is an update, and whereby all companies give everything to me' surely would have been exploited long before. With how things work with executive orders and all that jazz, no everything has to be amended and accepted. Legally you go with what's penned/printed down and likely definitions included. Just an update would require it's own license and unless you put in a clause of 'this version or any after' then you probably won't be hit by it.

Now WotC believe the brand name is so valuable you'd give up everything for it to exist in their system, and that's wrong, while D&D was one of the first it's openness was desired more than the system. No, i do believe they are burning so many bridges they will struggle for 10+ years at this point as i bet everyone who looks at or is explained the situation will boycott D&D. Honestly i'd rather do Herosystem or something, and Pathfinder is pretty good too. "You have 7 days to sign this", yes they wanted to sneaky get it out and lock everyone in before they knew what hit them.

Third, the strings attached. Did you notice they could update or decide to revoke the license at any time with 30 days notice to you, and you had to destroy everything you printed/created if they deem it? And they could basically absorb any and all works with the 'perpetual royalty-free, irrevocable license to use your works'. Basically they want you to generate them content they could sell, and you wouldn't see a dime. Feels like a bait and switch, you make a book/content, they revoke the license so you have to destroy it, oh and they acquired it just before they revoked it so they own it now...

No, in the end a lot of smaller publishers devs and content creators are probably going to band together and challenge them, and i don't think it will end well. That or everyone boycotts WotC and they get sold off since they are causing Hasbro a lot of issues at this point, and already causing problems with MTG.

edit: Also let's not forget the GSL (4e's license) bombed terribly and nearly no one adopted it. The OGL 1.1 is more like GSL 2.0.

For a hobby that's about content creation, about players and DMs collectively writing stories in the setting, it might lead to a one-level-of-indirection boycott. As in, "if you've read material that's under OGL 1.1, don't even share your ideas with me, because I want to be completely free of the taint until the lawsuits have settled".

Maybe. Far more likely from the looks and feel of it, everyone is going to back off and make their own systems or use another system that is safe. Videos from Yong Yea and others on the subject outright say they are backing out and making their own system.

In the near future within a few years 'the rise and fall of D&D' will probably come out, of how they had a near golden goose but believed they could own it all, only for it to puff away.

I've had the impression for a while, people are looking for something new and interesting anyways, but D&D was the most accepted and accessible. But unless WotC can create tons of content (to keep everyone happy), they will naturally homebrew and never tell WotC (so they can't steal it), or go to preferred authors or systems that haven't stabbed them in the back and who will promise not to because of how badly WotC is destroying their brand and making it cancer.

Trying to retroactively apply the new OGL to old content is very unlikely to hold up should they decide to take it to court (it'd break other licences like the GPL).

Even the original OGL is largely moot/unenforceable since you can't copyright game mechanics and the OGL already specifically excludes pretty much anything that could be (like specific settings, storylines, monsters, etc.). It basically allows you to use the things you are allowed to use anyway, licence or no licence.

Enforceability and legal issues aside, it still makes sense for independent creators/adjacent systems like Pathfinder to distance themselves from WotC given the open hostility on display.

Honestly, D&D started going down hill qhen TSR sold. I haven't found much appealing since that time.

Mhmm. And i bet other software companies, Microsoft, FSF, others will jump in too. With software there's open software, but there's also the underlying product, algorithms and stuff included in the Standard Library and Templates (so you don't have to 're-invent the wheel'), where EVERYONE possibly would be unwilling to make anything for fear if it will just possibly get scooped up later because the license can just get revoked/changed at a later date.

By default anything you make is yours and can't be shared/used by anyone without a license. A license simply gives permission for them to use it, to read/compile, and in most open software modify and share changes. Microsoft may give me a license to use their compiler, and i give a license to share my software. Microsoft can't later demand royalties for the framework or demand i destroy my own works simply because I'm a threat to them, or am making money because i used part of their library system.

Likely a new Open license unrelated to WotC will be drafted and adopted; It will also include stipulations and protections that any included content CAN'T be just scooped up and change owners or give unlimited royalty-free access if used in conjunction with another license or product. And if they fight that, well i don't see it ending well for WotC, as their attempt undermines the framework for law and agreements.
Hmmm... It was indeed a big change. Going from Thac0 to D20, from 20 the easiest AC to -10 the hardest, the varying growth from hits with a bow 1 per tern, 3/2 per turn, then 2 per turn, etc. Feats that seemed fairly useless... I can't say it went downhill. 3.0 was a major shift, and 3.5 was... better, though a bit broken. I think Pathfinder made it more fun and exciting and removing of dead levels and power levels more balanced.

As for stories and content? Not sure, i have only played 2 major campaigns in 2e, and it was all held together by my DM's, not TSR or by WotC.

Neither of you have done the basic research. It can't break any other license because WotC have gone and found an ambiguous (or at least they think so) phrase in the OGL 1.0, and they're trying to twist the wording of that specific phrase to mean that OGL 1.0 is no longer "authorized".

Good luck trying to get anyone to take them seriously when WotC themselves previously clarified that is not how section 9 works.

OGL 1.0a no longer being 'authorised', at best, could prevent people from using it for new content WotC choose to release.