![]() ![]() The authors of both have said the original intent as it to be ongoing and not revokable. The thing is Hasbro will not be able to revoke 1.0 or 1.0a. Can they sustain that long enough to come back? It'll be hard since to comply, Paizo will have to revise and reissue all their books, including stuff that's in the pipeline. Here's hoping they can make some lemonade out of this. This is what happened when 4e launched and Paizo did better because of it. Maybe I'm suspicious, but a kneecap attempt at Paizo? It would be funny if WotC's attempt to better monetize D&D ends up being a huge revenue boost to Paizo :D Interesting point that I saw over on the EnWorld 'lawyer' forum discussion that it looks like WotC is trying to claim that all content (other than 5E SRD) is no longer OGL because that license is being 'unauthorized'. My guess is that WoTC is out for blood, trying to end what they couldn't with 4E. There's no way WoTC couldnt' have forseen the outrage by the TTRPG community. I won't spend that much, but yea, I'm doing the same. Hopefully dropping $600 on them will help out a bit. I just did the same, though I'm still on 1E. They will be guarded by three house cats, one of whom may pee on their shoes. Paizo gets some additional $ for legal defense, and WotC can come and try to take my books. Goilveig wrote: Well, I just bought every rulebook for 2E that I don't already own. If Hasbro comes at other folks over this, it seems likely that their goal will be captivation or a settlement out of financial necessity well before things make it to a ruling. Yeah, also not a lawyer, but I'd guess that Hasbro/WotC ultimately doesn't want to force things in front of a judge who might actually rule on the situation.Ĭhanging the OGL like this seems to be a strong arm tactic to force other people out of the market (or to make it more expensive to sell/market their existing products, by virtue of adding legal costs to consider whether those products are now a liability) and to be able to restrict future products. It is more possible that Hasbro could file suit that current content in the Pact Worlds setting needs to be published under OGL 1.1 going forward - but that can be handled by removing any Hasbro/D&D proprietary content from the setting and publishing it under a non-OGL distribution license or simply under their own copyright with no redistribution license. So they can't retroactively claim that the Paizo setting copyright belongs to Hasbro under the terms of OGL 1.1 now when it was created under OGL 1.0. That is the retroactive rewriting of the agreement that violates the very foundations of contract law. And trying to sue for violations of the OGL 1.1 on content that was published under the OGL 1.0a license isn't going to hold up well. Hasbro would have to sue in order to enforce their OGL 1.1 license. 12Seal wrote: Can't help worrying that Golarion and the Pact Worlds may end up as Hasbro IPs, since it started as a D$D setting and has been OGL for so long.Īgain, disclaimer, not a lawyer and I am more familiar with open source software licenses than the OGL.įirst, the OGL is a distribution license - not a copyright. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |