So it looks to me like WOTC is intentionally confusing the language by refering to a "3.5 OGL" (which doesn't exist) and the 4e OGL.
Based on what they're saying, it's clear that what they are getting at, while obfuscating their language, is that the OGL 1.0a is being abandoned, and they will instead use a 4e trademark license. They aren't directly revealing that, though.
So in the end, they lied. They are not going to continue supporting open gaming or the existing OGL. And that's fine, their prerogative, I just don't like the subterfuge.
There are a few other threads on this already. You might want to read some of them to get a better idea of what is going on. Abandoning the 1.0a SRD/OGL and creating a 4E version which combines the SRD, OGL, and d20 license has nothing to do with them lying. The 4E OGL will exist but it is slightly more restrictive then the 1.0a version. It is there prerogative to restrict the license if they wish to. No one is forced to use the 4E license if they do not want to follow the restrictions. The 1.0a license will still be readily available for anyone who wants to publish using it.
__________________ The Mighty Avengers: 13 Legion of Doom: 1
There are a few other threads on this already. You might want to read some of them to get a better idea of what is going on. Abandoning the 1.0a SRD/OGL and creating a 4E version which combines the SRD, OGL, and d20 license has nothing to do with them lying. The 4E OGL will exist but it is slightly more restrictive then the 1.0a version. It is there prerogative to restrict the license if they wish to. No one is forced to use the 4E license if they do not want to follow the restrictions. The 1.0a license will still be readily available for anyone who wants to publish using it.
I have followed the threads.
Of course they can do what they want. My point is that their new "OGL" is either a new version of the current one, or it isn't. Clearly, from what they've said, it isn't. If it were, you could take the new SRD and do what you like with it under the OGL 1.0a (but without using their trademarks, of course).
Of course they can do what they want. My point is that their new "OGL" is either a new version of the current one, or it isn't. Clearly, from what they've said, it isn't. If it were, you could take the new SRD and do what you like with it under the OGL 1.0a (but without using their trademarks, of course).
You are trying to split too fine of a hair with your statement. I seriously doubt you will find any post by anyone from WotC where they state there will be a 4E OGL that functions exactly as the 1.0a version did. Stating 4E will be OGL does not expressly imply that it will be exactly the same as the 1.0a version.
__________________ The Mighty Avengers: 13 Legion of Doom: 1
You are trying to split too fine of a hair with your statement. I seriously doubt you will find any post by anyone from WotC where they state there will be a 4E OGL that functions exactly as the 1.0a version did. Stating 4E will be OGL does not expressly imply that it will be exactly the same as the 1.0a version.
No no, your going in a totally different direction. Again, either the OGL 1.0a is being modified, or a completely new license is being made. It looks like a completely new license is made. This means the current OGL, in any form new or old, will no longer be supported. It is a very important point as to whether the new license is a revision of the old one, or a completely new license unconnected to the OGL 1.0a.
No no, your going in a totally different direction. Again, either the OGL 1.0a is being modified, or a completely new license is being made. It looks like a completely new license is made. This means the current OGL, in any form new or old, will no longer be supported. It is a very important point as to whether the new license is a revision of the old one, or a completely new license unconnected to the OGL 1.0a.
No no, your going in a totally different direction. Again, either the OGL 1.0a is being modified, or a completely new license is being made. It looks like a completely new license is made. This means the current OGL, in any form new or old, will no longer be supported. It is a very important point as to whether the new license is a revision of the old one, or a completely new license unconnected to the OGL 1.0a.
Yes, it looks like a new OGL license is being made. That does not mean WotC lied about 4E being OGL - which is my whole point. WotC never stated 4E would be using the same OGL as 3.5, modified or not, so there is no lie. They just stated it would be OGL. You just assumed it would be 1.0a or a modified version of 1.0a.
__________________ The Mighty Avengers: 13 Legion of Doom: 1
So it looks to me like WOTC is intentionally confusing the language by refering to a "3.5 OGL" (which doesn't exist) and the 4e OGL.
As mentioned in the thread, it was transcribed from a conference call. I wouldn't be so hasty to point fingers at "intentionally confusing the language" when it's quite probable that they were just using more casual terminology.
Nonetheless, count me among those not thrilled by the new non-open "Open Gaming License".
Abandoning the 1.0a SRD/OGL and creating a 4E version which combines the SRD, OGL, and d20 license has nothing to do with them lying. The 4E OGL will exist but it is slightly more restrictive then the 1.0a version.
Let's imagine an analogous conversation:
Fans: Microsoft, will you still be supporting Windows XP next year?
Microsoft: Yes.
Fans: Great.
Microsoft: And by "yes", we mean that we'll be renaming some version of Windows Vista and calling it Windows XP. We'll be supporting that. And, thereby, supporting Windows XP.
Fans: Say what?
This is the same conversation WotC has had with fans regarding their continued support of open gaming:
Fans: Will there be an open SRD for 4th Edition?
WotC: Yes. We will continue to support the OGL.
Fans: Great.
WotC: And by OGL we mean a completely new license which is not an open license. But we'll be calling it the Open Gaming License anyway.
Fans: Say what?
I don't know. What I see is that it's an open license that has time constraints that could be lethal for some third party publishers. I don't see deception, but if this is the earliest warning of their plans, then I could see how the publishers would take offense.
Linear Mode
