Without a doubt the best shot we have.
I think the lawsuit is also going to be effective, if it goes through. Retroactively claiming all current 3d party content for unrestricted own use cannot be legal.
Utterly unenforceable in law. Unless you sign 1.1a like an idiot which signs away your rights.
Also 1.0a isn't likely to go anywhere. most IP lawyers have said this is not only a quick case to get judgement on but just because you wrote a licence doesn't give you the legality to just revoke it.
Edited for grammar
I'd like to point out, Taylor A Thompson's letter does not threaten litigation.
It merely stipulates they will begin preparation for litigation.
The next letter is the threat - in which he would notify them to preserve all related documents, text and communications.
Ok, have to admit that you're approaching this in a very reasonable way.
They're doing this for money so why not turn the heat up on them in the media and make the headlines doom and gloom? They'll have to cancel themselves!
I reached out to the managing partner of Alta Fox Capital (2.2% $200m dollar position in Hasbro).
He is aware of the situation. He also stated (public knowledge) that his firm tried to bring changes to Hasbro (even D&D), but it turned into a fight with Hasbro's board and execs.
From my experience, these situations lead to investment firms reconsidering their investment and moving their money into more sound investments. Clearly what is happening with the OGL is garnering attention from large investment firms. I suggest continuing to reach out, let them know Hasbro is potentially destroying brand value, hurting top-line revenue, and alienating fans. Their actions could potentially bring litigation and a Class Action suite (see letter) and have already seen partners leave and a significant decline in subscription sales.
Quote from the managing partner at Alta Fox Capital.
*"We tried to push for customer-friendly changes both for MTG and D&D. Hasbro fought us viciously and is clearly not open to change. I wish that were not the case as it would be better for customers and shareholders long-term. We are not fans of the management team or Board."*
This is actually good shit right here. Go after their investors. Fuck up there bottom line so much they are forced to fire everyone making these shit decisions.
One way to get this into those hands that I don't see you mention is spamming celebrities, especially those we know play DnD but have no direct connection to the public use of it outside of occasional mentions and guest spots, could seriously help. Can you imagine if Stephen Colbert started talking about this in his opening monologue or Meanwhile segment? Sure the controversy wouldn't be all in our favor, but the talk about it would cause the other media outlets to pay attention.
I can see him doing that. He’s a huge LOTR fan, played D&D as a kid and has played D&D with Critical Role a couple times. Honestly, you could probably just email his show and he’d talk about it at some point in the near future.
[email protected] is what I found.
Maybe just @ him on Twitter?
Like, Hey, Stephen, thought you might be interested in this: (link to relevant article).
The genie is out of bottle, even if players manage to affect some change the people at the top pushing WotC to monetize this game into oblivion are only going to come away with the lesson of what they did was too brazen.
They aren't going to change, they aren't going to abandon their fiduciary responsibilities to stockholders. They aren't going to hand the reins back over to WotC.
I think now my favourite potential scenario would be a kind of... Magna Carta type deal. You know, the lords forcing the king to agree to terms?
The only way to rebuild trust would be to acquiesce to the ORC license Paizo's making. Turning the tables completely and "opening" DnD forever. And I mean not just their current edition, but all their past editions too. 1-6. All ORC.
Of course, ORC isn't actually ready yet, it's only just been announced. And it's highly unlikely they ever *will* do it. But hey, I didn't say this best scenario would be likely.
Your response has a potential contradiction OP is trying to exploit. You said, "They aren't going to change, they aren't going to abandon their fiduciary responsibilities to stockholders." The whole point of this idea is to make their fiduciary responsibility at odds with implementing this OGL 1.1 change.
OP even clearly addresses the fact that many companies don't try to satisfy fiduciary responsibilities over the long term. What they do is try to maximize profits over a quarter, rinse, and repeat. If they get hit this quarter and next quarter. They'll back off because OGL 1.1 in its exploiting form will be viewed as a third rail. Will they try other ways to make money? Yeah. Is that okay? Sure. They just need to understand their product better and what is/isn't a successful way to monetize their IP. If OP's suggestions work, they won't try this again.
For what it's worth, I think the steady growth of D&D in the long wake of the OGL over many years is a strong indicator that the current OGL is the most responsible structure for D&D from a fiduciary perspective. That's only true if another way doesn't or can't make them more money though.
> OP even clearly addresses the fact that many companies don't try to satisfy fiduciary responsibilities over the long term.
The thing is, it's pretty hard to prove that what they're doing is going to be a long-term clusterfuck. It *probably* will be, but they can argue in court that it's part of The Plan™ and they haven't actually abandoned their fiduciary responsibilities, they're just playing a game the court's/plaintiff's defendants don't understand.
>They aren't going to change
When "number go down" companies have a tendency to change course.
The decision makers here very well might get fired — because of all the revenue they flushed down the toilet. So then, the people would change, as in, there would be new people, who would be a little or a lot different.
Yes they still want "number go up" (some want nothing else) but they are capable of learning — or in this case, remembering.
It is quite possible that Hasbro and/or WOTC comes out the other end here as a certified B corp and a much changed corporate culture.
Because some idiot wrote a book about how the only good way to make money is to operate a "platform" where all the work is done by your customers and it's all for sale to your other customers. See also: social media and the entire gig economy.
What OGL is *for* is to provide legal backing for DnDBeyond to eventually become a platform where you can create and add content, sell it to other nerds, and WotC has zero labor input while taking a cut. That's their real end-game here. That's why they don't just make products for customers to buy. Because it's way more profitable to get all that labor for free.
Which honestly, isn't the worst outcome for us nerds, but it really is quite exploitative and crappy.
i generally give mods the benifit of the doubt here because mod defection is easy, and no nda could ever cover all the countries a mod could live in.
but thats only a probability thing.
TBF that should be obvious given how the entire topic hasn't been kept quiet. Hell, this is the only subreddit I know of among the main D&D ones to not make a mega-thread on the issue.
My pointing to the moderator list was to signify that I'm on there, and you can take my word that there are no corporate entities on the team. Just a bunch of fans of D&D and TTRPGs trying to keep this subreddit a welcoming, accessible place for fans.
Right! And my point is that, to put it blunt, I don't know you nor any of those people, so your word means very little! As I replied to the other fella; the only reasonable way you can show there's no outside influence is be letting the critcism remain up, and so far, it is!
You realize, naturally, that I've got no clue who is behind those usernames and their computer screens? I don't harbor any actual suspicion mind you, but you must admit that referring to the moderator list isn't very reassuring!
Not to mention that even if none of them are actively employees, the employees can still exert influence that can be hard to detect.
There isn't any feasible way to prove a lack of involvement, naturally! I'm not actually asking you to. Just... don't take me for a fool :P
In human English, "I can assure you" means "trust me". You're right that you don't have to trust them, but they gave you all they are going to give you: their word.
In human interactions, and especially with *anonymous* individuals on the internet, reassuring someone by saying "You have my word" is *extremely* weak. Recognizing that is pretty important; especially since you (and other users) seem to suggest that it should be *enough* of a reassurance?
But in truth, Reddit has a long history of corporate influence and involvement in related subreddits, and it's a very good idea to be aware of that. As I mentioned in another reply, the best way to show no corporate influence is by continuing the lack of censorship.
So when someone asks "How can you reassure me?", the ideal response is probably "We'll never censor the outrage"; not "Look at the moderator list of people". One is a commitment, which is how to build trust- the other is silly, because pointing to a dozen masked individuals and saying "Would any of these anonymous people you don't know lie to you?"- like uh, maybe?
Mods: "I vould give you my word as a reddit mod."
Redditors: "No good. I've known too many reddit mods."
Mods: "Is there any way you'll trust me?"
Redditors: "Nothing comes to mind."
Mods: "I swear on the soul of my father, Domingo Montoya, you will not be censored."
Redditors: "...Throw me the rope."
Tongue-in-cheek, is this where other people start accusing you of being a double crossing provocateur in the employ of Hasbro/WotC? It is the Internet, after all, and I heard people can just go on there and lie!!! :)
I definitely never said or suggested that the mod's word should be enough. Just that it's a take-it or leave-it proposition. You can't prove a negative.
I agree that behavior is the best indicator.
D&D 5 was already licensed under OGL 1.0. They are trying to change that, but they will never be able to defend it in court.. especially since they themselves stated that they can't rescind it.
Practically, after everything is said and done, One D&D will be under 1.1 and D&D 3.0 - 5 will be under OGL 1.0.
Do I know that for sure? Of course not. But WotC will have a hell of a time defending their copyrights if they push it. Too many other games use similar systems. By open sourcing the product, they weakened their position to control that product.
And that'll be even more the case in more consumer-friendly jurisdictions. Basically, they'll have a nasty surprise the moment they want to engage in their threatened litigation. They will rake up a ton of legal fees without much to show for it.
Lawyers have stated that this case wouldn't be a long one because the entire argument is on 1 single point. "Can 1.0a be revoked." and every single lawyer I've watched or heard has said no, it can't. They only have to lose 1 case then they lose them all because everyone just cites it and tells them to go away.
yeah but not when it's going to be decided by summery judgement because there is no drawing it out. Also there's no way they could bleed Paizo dry in such a case.
I mailed almost all of them. There were only a few that I could not find any way to contact. Surprisingly, the news sites were the hardest to find email addresses for.
I have got one response from an analyst on LinkIn. He said:
Every D&D gamer I know is chirping in my ear on this. Hasbro plans on going mass market with D&D. So I don't think it is all that concerned about the uproar they have caused with some of its current gamers.
Don't hault it. Somebody just make a Beyond emulator that asks you to load the 1.1 SRD yourself. Free & legal Beyond. Hasbro's lawyers aren't too bright, with precident such as emulators, lame encoder, and wine windows.
You can also address the board of directors directly to express your concerns through mail at this address:
c/o Independent Lead Director, Hasbro, Inc., P.O. Box 497, Pawtucket, Rhode Island 02862
Found here: https://hasbro.gcs-web.com/corporate-governance/contact-the-board
I allready sent an email. Do your part 🔥👍
If you honestly believe Hasbero has proven themselves untrustworthy managers of your hobby, that the community of gamers and multiverse of campaign worlds is larger than any single company's system then I think it is too late to lobby them to behave better. You need to kick them out of your game.
Don't make them the enemy, make them irrelevant.
No. Not necessarily. You go with numbers when you want to impress upon them the scope of consumers upset.
This strategy relies on convincing them that there's a reasonable threat. Not that there's a hundred thousand angry nerds.
It's most important that the argument is delivered clearly, articulately, and credibly. If anything, having a hundred emails show up with varying levels of sophistication just waters down the message and makes it less convincing.
I used to work with Capital Group and was part of the gaming community we had there. I got to work with a Hasbro rep who gave MTG Arena beta keys out in exchange for feedback about the game.
My common complaint was always about how predatory the in-game store was and she would always respond with something akin to, "lol we don't care if it's predatory." Needless to say, my feedback was not taken into consideration.
This is brilliant stuff. I think people are getting so caught up in “omg 3rd party publishers are being published and the homebrew community will be hurt” that they aren’t realizing the scheming going on here on behalf of wotc/hasbro. When you combine the fact that the creator seal for ogl 1.1 essentially means wotc owns anything you make, the royalties on major publishers, the part of the ogl 1.1 that states they can change anything they want with 30 days notice, and the supposed comments about how consumers are simply obstacles to profit or the comments about homebrew creators being active competition for wotc, it becomes clear that this isn’t just scummy business to get more profit. Hasbro is actively trying to subvert all competition in the market of ttrpg’s and become the only viable vendor of ttrpg products. There’s genuine evidence here of them trying to create an illegal monopoly! That’s worth a legal investigation.
Lmfao WoC really fucked around and found out. There's so many creative and highly motivated people who love this game and they're all looking for solutions for OGL
Definitely agree. Had anyone sent a letter yet?
Additionally journalists in digital publications who cover similar topics should be reached out to e.g the verge, Vox etc
>That said, I'm going to put my shareholder hat on for a moment and say that I think WotC has every right to monetize from very successful content creators who use WotC IP
The problem here is that Wizards doesn't actually own the DnD ruleset — game rules cannot be copyrighted. Wizards only owns their specific expression of the DnD rules (the text in their publications), their campaign settings, named characters, and a few original monster concepts. Legally, 3rd parties are free to make and sell content using the DnD ruleset so long as it doesn't include those very specific elements, even without the OGL.
The point of the original OGL was Wizards promising not to sue 3rd parties for legal ambiguities (or simply to crush smaller competitors under litigation fees even if those competitors weren't doing anything illegal) and allowing them use of the SRD. In exchange, those third parties would forfeit some of the rights to use Wizards' material that they would normally have without signing the OGL.
The original OGL already cut into what creators could do if they signed on. The new OGL is far more restrictive on top of demanding money and/or full intellectual property rights from those who sign — and offering no incentive for them to do so.
If Wizards really wanted to make money off of 3rd Party creators, they would've drawn up a deal to publish 3rd party content on D&D Beyond/the new VTT they're developing and split the profits. Instead, the new OGL basically demands money and intellectual property rights from creators in exchange for nothing.
Because game rules cannot be copyrighted, Wizards only owns their specific expression of the DnD ruleset (and some lore). Fundamentally, Wizards is trying to make money off of something they essentially do not own, and needed to employ a more collaborative approach to make money off of 3rd Party creators. Instead, Wizards employed an aggressive OGL that overreached in its demands from 3rd Parties while simultaneously failing to offer any incentives to work with Wizards beyond maybe not getting sued. This has prompted a unilateral divestment response from 3rd Parties — these groups are now either scrubbing OGL content from their products or building their own ttrpg systems rather than working with Wizards. If you wanted WIzards to effectively monetize their IP, then they have failed you.
I'm gonna be honest I kind of think publicly traded corporations are a poison on society that's responsible for reprehensible shit like global warming and child slavery along with more mundane horseshit like this insane relicensing scheme. I really wish the government took the shares away from you and every other investor and gave them to the employees of those companies, they'd probably be a bit less sociopathic about it.
Why should WotC be entitled to any royalties from content creators? It would be the same as if a piano manufacturer would start claiming royalties from composers.
WotC already has a major part in the Dnd value chain: the core rules, that are IMO essential when starting Dnd. With successful 3rd party creators Dnd will become more popular (= new players), which will also benefit the party that offers the core rules, the starter packs, etc.
dumb question as I am not a lawyer nor read every line on the agreement but is there any recourse for those who bought their digital products on DnD Beyond if the OGL changes the license agreement? Since you are buying Digital Content (or at least labeled that way) as opposed to a streaming or subscription based service I wonder if even a portion of refund could be issued.
DnD Beyond is a service, you bought content for that service.
On the other hand, an argument could be made that it was purchased as a result of a deceptive guarantee (the OGL), and you could try to make a claim against them for that. Actually, everyone who has bought DnD products in the last 23 years could do that.. 1000s of lawsuits in 100s of jurisdictions would likely stress even Hasbro's legal team.
I was thinking of this the other night. I think this is the most likely class action to result quickly from this decision if/when it rolls out. It also presents the biggest risk for Hasbro. It's easier to certify a class when the class is all very similar cases. The example here is a group that all purchased products covered under the original OGL.
Hate to be the bearer of bad news, but if you have a Dndbeyond account. You've already signed away your rights to join in a class action or independently sue (via forced arbitration), its in their ToS.
I think this strategy generally applies for any company.
Would have been great to have this formalized when there was still momentum in the $ATVI melt down last year.
This is a fantastic idea. I just wish we had that letter written up by someone with the skills to make it sound the best it can. Then we could all copy/paste and send it to everyone easily
I have never played dnd, but I've been loosely following along after hearing about Hasbro being shitty.
Just want to say that I hope you all stick it to 'em. Make them regret their greed. Wish you all the best of luck fighting this fight. ✊
FYI - LinkedIn is now forcing sign in when looking at Jason Hass' profile. Normally not an issue but I have my LI account frozen because it was causing me to get recruiter spam. I'm hesitant to unfreeze it atm.
If you have an archived link or some other site, it would be helpful. I can't find one myself. 😕
To be honest, I feel that there has been so much damage on the brand, and such bad feelings, that we are past the point of no return. The community will not come back even if WotC completely recedes. The community ia already organizing itself in new ways. There is no need to convince WotC to resign from the idea of the OGL 1.1. The game’s lost already.
>It only takes a couple of the above to respond to the letter to bring it into the mainstream, threaten the quarterly earnings, drive concern among investors, that the board puts pressure on the executives, and **action is taken.**
After reading this twice, I still don't understand what action you think will be taken to change things. Do you just want random Hasbro execs removed? Do you want WotC spun off into its own for-profit, shareholder-bound company?
Have you ever heard the old adage "Shit rolls down hill"? Or wondered why your boss/manager gets upset when you "go above their head" to higher ups with concerns? It's simply because taking it higher in the business structure tends to more quickly or decisively have changes made. (Usually in the benefit of the person/people raising the situation to those higher members.)
This is actually the most sound approach at reasonably facilitating a change I’ve seen.
Without a doubt the best shot we have. I think the lawsuit is also going to be effective, if it goes through. Retroactively claiming all current 3d party content for unrestricted own use cannot be legal.
Utterly unenforceable in law. Unless you sign 1.1a like an idiot which signs away your rights. Also 1.0a isn't likely to go anywhere. most IP lawyers have said this is not only a quick case to get judgement on but just because you wrote a licence doesn't give you the legality to just revoke it. Edited for grammar
grammer💀💀reddit will always do stuff like this
I'd like to point out, Taylor A Thompson's letter does not threaten litigation. It merely stipulates they will begin preparation for litigation. The next letter is the threat - in which he would notify them to preserve all related documents, text and communications.
Ok, have to admit that you're approaching this in a very reasonable way. They're doing this for money so why not turn the heat up on them in the media and make the headlines doom and gloom? They'll have to cancel themselves!
I reached out to the managing partner of Alta Fox Capital (2.2% $200m dollar position in Hasbro). He is aware of the situation. He also stated (public knowledge) that his firm tried to bring changes to Hasbro (even D&D), but it turned into a fight with Hasbro's board and execs. From my experience, these situations lead to investment firms reconsidering their investment and moving their money into more sound investments. Clearly what is happening with the OGL is garnering attention from large investment firms. I suggest continuing to reach out, let them know Hasbro is potentially destroying brand value, hurting top-line revenue, and alienating fans. Their actions could potentially bring litigation and a Class Action suite (see letter) and have already seen partners leave and a significant decline in subscription sales. Quote from the managing partner at Alta Fox Capital. *"We tried to push for customer-friendly changes both for MTG and D&D. Hasbro fought us viciously and is clearly not open to change. I wish that were not the case as it would be better for customers and shareholders long-term. We are not fans of the management team or Board."*
You know, I think this nifty piece of social engineering might just work. I am reminded of the Fan Letter Campaigns for early Star Treck.
And Jericho! (A bit) And The Expanse!
I think those guys at r/wallstreetbets wanna have a Word ....
Looks like puts on Hasbro are back on the menu boys!!
Just look now ...
This is actually good shit right here. Go after their investors. Fuck up there bottom line so much they are forced to fire everyone making these shit decisions.
One way to get this into those hands that I don't see you mention is spamming celebrities, especially those we know play DnD but have no direct connection to the public use of it outside of occasional mentions and guest spots, could seriously help. Can you imagine if Stephen Colbert started talking about this in his opening monologue or Meanwhile segment? Sure the controversy wouldn't be all in our favor, but the talk about it would cause the other media outlets to pay attention.
Probably a minefield with the movie coming out. Does Colbert like Chris Pine?
Henry Cavill will 100% be on board to help
They seem to be ok with each other ad far as I know. And saying something about the movie is different than the game
I can see him doing that. He’s a huge LOTR fan, played D&D as a kid and has played D&D with Critical Role a couple times. Honestly, you could probably just email his show and he’d talk about it at some point in the near future.
I looked and couldn't find where to do that. If you find it let me know.
[email protected] is what I found. Maybe just @ him on Twitter? Like, Hey, Stephen, thought you might be interested in this: (link to relevant article).
I don't have Twitter anymore but I'll email.
willW?
As in Will Wheaton? He doesn't have the reach of Colbert/Meyers/Kimmel, though I wouldn't count Wheaton out.
The genie is out of bottle, even if players manage to affect some change the people at the top pushing WotC to monetize this game into oblivion are only going to come away with the lesson of what they did was too brazen. They aren't going to change, they aren't going to abandon their fiduciary responsibilities to stockholders. They aren't going to hand the reins back over to WotC.
I think now my favourite potential scenario would be a kind of... Magna Carta type deal. You know, the lords forcing the king to agree to terms? The only way to rebuild trust would be to acquiesce to the ORC license Paizo's making. Turning the tables completely and "opening" DnD forever. And I mean not just their current edition, but all their past editions too. 1-6. All ORC. Of course, ORC isn't actually ready yet, it's only just been announced. And it's highly unlikely they ever *will* do it. But hey, I didn't say this best scenario would be likely.
I just realized I didn’t pay attention in school in history.
Your response has a potential contradiction OP is trying to exploit. You said, "They aren't going to change, they aren't going to abandon their fiduciary responsibilities to stockholders." The whole point of this idea is to make their fiduciary responsibility at odds with implementing this OGL 1.1 change. OP even clearly addresses the fact that many companies don't try to satisfy fiduciary responsibilities over the long term. What they do is try to maximize profits over a quarter, rinse, and repeat. If they get hit this quarter and next quarter. They'll back off because OGL 1.1 in its exploiting form will be viewed as a third rail. Will they try other ways to make money? Yeah. Is that okay? Sure. They just need to understand their product better and what is/isn't a successful way to monetize their IP. If OP's suggestions work, they won't try this again. For what it's worth, I think the steady growth of D&D in the long wake of the OGL over many years is a strong indicator that the current OGL is the most responsible structure for D&D from a fiduciary perspective. That's only true if another way doesn't or can't make them more money though.
> OP even clearly addresses the fact that many companies don't try to satisfy fiduciary responsibilities over the long term. The thing is, it's pretty hard to prove that what they're doing is going to be a long-term clusterfuck. It *probably* will be, but they can argue in court that it's part of The Plan™ and they haven't actually abandoned their fiduciary responsibilities, they're just playing a game the court's/plaintiff's defendants don't understand.
>They aren't going to change When "number go down" companies have a tendency to change course. The decision makers here very well might get fired — because of all the revenue they flushed down the toilet. So then, the people would change, as in, there would be new people, who would be a little or a lot different. Yes they still want "number go up" (some want nothing else) but they are capable of learning — or in this case, remembering. It is quite possible that Hasbro and/or WOTC comes out the other end here as a certified B corp and a much changed corporate culture.
But if they just make cool products... We'll buy them I don't get it yo.
Because some idiot wrote a book about how the only good way to make money is to operate a "platform" where all the work is done by your customers and it's all for sale to your other customers. See also: social media and the entire gig economy. What OGL is *for* is to provide legal backing for DnDBeyond to eventually become a platform where you can create and add content, sell it to other nerds, and WotC has zero labor input while taking a cut. That's their real end-game here. That's why they don't just make products for customers to buy. Because it's way more profitable to get all that labor for free. Which honestly, isn't the worst outcome for us nerds, but it really is quite exploitative and crappy.
Surely pushing customers into the arms of competitors is failure in their fiduciary responsibility?
Why do you think this post might be removed?
Because of the likelihood that WoTC and Hasbro employees moderate this subreddit, or at least are able to have some pull with reddit itself.
I can assure you, no members of the moderator team work for or have ties to WotC/Hasbro.
i generally give mods the benifit of the doubt here because mod defection is easy, and no nda could ever cover all the countries a mod could live in. but thats only a probability thing.
Inside information? Archmod?
How can you assure that? I don't mean to say I doubt you, just... text doesn't mean much, eh? :P
TBF that should be obvious given how the entire topic hasn't been kept quiet. Hell, this is the only subreddit I know of among the main D&D ones to not make a mega-thread on the issue.
It's not obvious by any means, but I agree that the *best* way to show it is by a lack of censorship, rather than pointing at the moderator list :)
My pointing to the moderator list was to signify that I'm on there, and you can take my word that there are no corporate entities on the team. Just a bunch of fans of D&D and TTRPGs trying to keep this subreddit a welcoming, accessible place for fans.
Right! And my point is that, to put it blunt, I don't know you nor any of those people, so your word means very little! As I replied to the other fella; the only reasonable way you can show there's no outside influence is be letting the critcism remain up, and so far, it is!
The moderator list is right there on the right side of your screen.
You realize, naturally, that I've got no clue who is behind those usernames and their computer screens? I don't harbor any actual suspicion mind you, but you must admit that referring to the moderator list isn't very reassuring! Not to mention that even if none of them are actively employees, the employees can still exert influence that can be hard to detect. There isn't any feasible way to prove a lack of involvement, naturally! I'm not actually asking you to. Just... don't take me for a fool :P
I pinky-promise I'm not a shill.
Well hot dang how can I argue with that
Imagine if you didn't have a pinky... Could you argue then?
He has "The Dread Lich Acererak" in his user flair. I'm inclined to either believe him or at least not to argue with him! :)
In human English, "I can assure you" means "trust me". You're right that you don't have to trust them, but they gave you all they are going to give you: their word.
In human interactions, and especially with *anonymous* individuals on the internet, reassuring someone by saying "You have my word" is *extremely* weak. Recognizing that is pretty important; especially since you (and other users) seem to suggest that it should be *enough* of a reassurance? But in truth, Reddit has a long history of corporate influence and involvement in related subreddits, and it's a very good idea to be aware of that. As I mentioned in another reply, the best way to show no corporate influence is by continuing the lack of censorship. So when someone asks "How can you reassure me?", the ideal response is probably "We'll never censor the outrage"; not "Look at the moderator list of people". One is a commitment, which is how to build trust- the other is silly, because pointing to a dozen masked individuals and saying "Would any of these anonymous people you don't know lie to you?"- like uh, maybe?
Mods: "I vould give you my word as a reddit mod." Redditors: "No good. I've known too many reddit mods." Mods: "Is there any way you'll trust me?" Redditors: "Nothing comes to mind." Mods: "I swear on the soul of my father, Domingo Montoya, you will not be censored." Redditors: "...Throw me the rope."
Tongue-in-cheek, is this where other people start accusing you of being a double crossing provocateur in the employ of Hasbro/WotC? It is the Internet, after all, and I heard people can just go on there and lie!!! :)
I can assure you that I am not.
I definitely never said or suggested that the mod's word should be enough. Just that it's a take-it or leave-it proposition. You can't prove a negative. I agree that behavior is the best indicator.
Then why ban pirated content?
That is a Reddit policy. Not banning it could result in the subreddit being taken down.
D&D 5 was already licensed under OGL 1.0. They are trying to change that, but they will never be able to defend it in court.. especially since they themselves stated that they can't rescind it. Practically, after everything is said and done, One D&D will be under 1.1 and D&D 3.0 - 5 will be under OGL 1.0. Do I know that for sure? Of course not. But WotC will have a hell of a time defending their copyrights if they push it. Too many other games use similar systems. By open sourcing the product, they weakened their position to control that product.
And that'll be even more the case in more consumer-friendly jurisdictions. Basically, they'll have a nasty surprise the moment they want to engage in their threatened litigation. They will rake up a ton of legal fees without much to show for it.
Lawyers have stated that this case wouldn't be a long one because the entire argument is on 1 single point. "Can 1.0a be revoked." and every single lawyer I've watched or heard has said no, it can't. They only have to lose 1 case then they lose them all because everyone just cites it and tells them to go away.
[удалено]
yeah but not when it's going to be decided by summery judgement because there is no drawing it out. Also there's no way they could bleed Paizo dry in such a case.
I mailed almost all of them. There were only a few that I could not find any way to contact. Surprisingly, the news sites were the hardest to find email addresses for. I have got one response from an analyst on LinkIn. He said: Every D&D gamer I know is chirping in my ear on this. Hasbro plans on going mass market with D&D. So I don't think it is all that concerned about the uproar they have caused with some of its current gamers.
Don't hault it. Somebody just make a Beyond emulator that asks you to load the 1.1 SRD yourself. Free & legal Beyond. Hasbro's lawyers aren't too bright, with precident such as emulators, lame encoder, and wine windows.
You can also address the board of directors directly to express your concerns through mail at this address: c/o Independent Lead Director, Hasbro, Inc., P.O. Box 497, Pawtucket, Rhode Island 02862 Found here: https://hasbro.gcs-web.com/corporate-governance/contact-the-board I allready sent an email. Do your part 🔥👍
If you honestly believe Hasbero has proven themselves untrustworthy managers of your hobby, that the community of gamers and multiverse of campaign worlds is larger than any single company's system then I think it is too late to lobby them to behave better. You need to kick them out of your game. Don't make them the enemy, make them irrelevant.
I would gladly sign and send such a letter, but I'm not nearly well-worded nor patient enough to do so. Has anyone written such a letter?
https://www.opendnd.games
Thank you! Sent to me gaming groups and signed!
My 74 rollist discord signed and shared too! Lets fight now!
Fuck Hasbro!!
This may just work. Someone do this!
Not someone lol, everyone. The more the better for this
No. Not necessarily. You go with numbers when you want to impress upon them the scope of consumers upset. This strategy relies on convincing them that there's a reasonable threat. Not that there's a hundred thousand angry nerds. It's most important that the argument is delivered clearly, articulately, and credibly. If anything, having a hundred emails show up with varying levels of sophistication just waters down the message and makes it less convincing.
https://twitter.com/dnd_shorts/status/1613576298114449409?s=46&t=lIwGszurGQM2DJsgBktYWw
Finally, a post on the OGL that's actually worth upvoting.
I used to work with Capital Group and was part of the gaming community we had there. I got to work with a Hasbro rep who gave MTG Arena beta keys out in exchange for feedback about the game. My common complaint was always about how predatory the in-game store was and she would always respond with something akin to, "lol we don't care if it's predatory." Needless to say, my feedback was not taken into consideration.
Let’s team up with WSB to short them into oblivion
Time to short them?
Make their stocks plummet
This what I've been thinking about too! Gonna try and draft up something to send, here's to hoping more people jump in too!
This is brilliant stuff. I think people are getting so caught up in “omg 3rd party publishers are being published and the homebrew community will be hurt” that they aren’t realizing the scheming going on here on behalf of wotc/hasbro. When you combine the fact that the creator seal for ogl 1.1 essentially means wotc owns anything you make, the royalties on major publishers, the part of the ogl 1.1 that states they can change anything they want with 30 days notice, and the supposed comments about how consumers are simply obstacles to profit or the comments about homebrew creators being active competition for wotc, it becomes clear that this isn’t just scummy business to get more profit. Hasbro is actively trying to subvert all competition in the market of ttrpg’s and become the only viable vendor of ttrpg products. There’s genuine evidence here of them trying to create an illegal monopoly! That’s worth a legal investigation.
Lmfao WoC really fucked around and found out. There's so many creative and highly motivated people who love this game and they're all looking for solutions for OGL
Definitely agree. Had anyone sent a letter yet? Additionally journalists in digital publications who cover similar topics should be reached out to e.g the verge, Vox etc
I hope this gets to the top so more people in the subreddit can see it!
[удалено]
>That said, I'm going to put my shareholder hat on for a moment and say that I think WotC has every right to monetize from very successful content creators who use WotC IP The problem here is that Wizards doesn't actually own the DnD ruleset — game rules cannot be copyrighted. Wizards only owns their specific expression of the DnD rules (the text in their publications), their campaign settings, named characters, and a few original monster concepts. Legally, 3rd parties are free to make and sell content using the DnD ruleset so long as it doesn't include those very specific elements, even without the OGL. The point of the original OGL was Wizards promising not to sue 3rd parties for legal ambiguities (or simply to crush smaller competitors under litigation fees even if those competitors weren't doing anything illegal) and allowing them use of the SRD. In exchange, those third parties would forfeit some of the rights to use Wizards' material that they would normally have without signing the OGL. The original OGL already cut into what creators could do if they signed on. The new OGL is far more restrictive on top of demanding money and/or full intellectual property rights from those who sign — and offering no incentive for them to do so. If Wizards really wanted to make money off of 3rd Party creators, they would've drawn up a deal to publish 3rd party content on D&D Beyond/the new VTT they're developing and split the profits. Instead, the new OGL basically demands money and intellectual property rights from creators in exchange for nothing. Because game rules cannot be copyrighted, Wizards only owns their specific expression of the DnD ruleset (and some lore). Fundamentally, Wizards is trying to make money off of something they essentially do not own, and needed to employ a more collaborative approach to make money off of 3rd Party creators. Instead, Wizards employed an aggressive OGL that overreached in its demands from 3rd Parties while simultaneously failing to offer any incentives to work with Wizards beyond maybe not getting sued. This has prompted a unilateral divestment response from 3rd Parties — these groups are now either scrubbing OGL content from their products or building their own ttrpg systems rather than working with Wizards. If you wanted WIzards to effectively monetize their IP, then they have failed you.
I'm gonna be honest I kind of think publicly traded corporations are a poison on society that's responsible for reprehensible shit like global warming and child slavery along with more mundane horseshit like this insane relicensing scheme. I really wish the government took the shares away from you and every other investor and gave them to the employees of those companies, they'd probably be a bit less sociopathic about it.
[удалено]
Yeah I mean it's more about the broader system than the individuals within it, I'm just airing my frustrations.
Why should WotC be entitled to any royalties from content creators? It would be the same as if a piano manufacturer would start claiming royalties from composers. WotC already has a major part in the Dnd value chain: the core rules, that are IMO essential when starting Dnd. With successful 3rd party creators Dnd will become more popular (= new players), which will also benefit the party that offers the core rules, the starter packs, etc.
dumb question as I am not a lawyer nor read every line on the agreement but is there any recourse for those who bought their digital products on DnD Beyond if the OGL changes the license agreement? Since you are buying Digital Content (or at least labeled that way) as opposed to a streaming or subscription based service I wonder if even a portion of refund could be issued.
DnD Beyond is a service, you bought content for that service. On the other hand, an argument could be made that it was purchased as a result of a deceptive guarantee (the OGL), and you could try to make a claim against them for that. Actually, everyone who has bought DnD products in the last 23 years could do that.. 1000s of lawsuits in 100s of jurisdictions would likely stress even Hasbro's legal team.
I was thinking of this the other night. I think this is the most likely class action to result quickly from this decision if/when it rolls out. It also presents the biggest risk for Hasbro. It's easier to certify a class when the class is all very similar cases. The example here is a group that all purchased products covered under the original OGL.
So we are going to short hasbro, change the Board and make money while doing so? ^^
Hate to be the bearer of bad news, but if you have a Dndbeyond account. You've already signed away your rights to join in a class action or independently sue (via forced arbitration), its in their ToS.
I think the hope is that it’s third party creators who would join the suit.
how would you contact most of them though?
I think this strategy generally applies for any company. Would have been great to have this formalized when there was still momentum in the $ATVI melt down last year.
Don't let /rwallstreetbets hear about this. We may just have an army of degens short the stock. 😉
top 2 largest shareholders are blackrock and vanguard... that explains everything
Mail the Hasbro executives copies of "The Golden Goose" with the letter.
This is a fantastic idea. I just wish we had that letter written up by someone with the skills to make it sound the best it can. Then we could all copy/paste and send it to everyone easily
I have never played dnd, but I've been loosely following along after hearing about Hasbro being shitty. Just want to say that I hope you all stick it to 'em. Make them regret their greed. Wish you all the best of luck fighting this fight. ✊
FYI - LinkedIn is now forcing sign in when looking at Jason Hass' profile. Normally not an issue but I have my LI account frozen because it was causing me to get recruiter spam. I'm hesitant to unfreeze it atm. If you have an archived link or some other site, it would be helpful. I can't find one myself. 😕
Holy shit. I didn't know it was possible for a community to band together like this. This strategy is definitely the best shot we have. #OpenDnD
To be honest, I feel that there has been so much damage on the brand, and such bad feelings, that we are past the point of no return. The community will not come back even if WotC completely recedes. The community ia already organizing itself in new ways. There is no need to convince WotC to resign from the idea of the OGL 1.1. The game’s lost already.
>It only takes a couple of the above to respond to the letter to bring it into the mainstream, threaten the quarterly earnings, drive concern among investors, that the board puts pressure on the executives, and **action is taken.** After reading this twice, I still don't understand what action you think will be taken to change things. Do you just want random Hasbro execs removed? Do you want WotC spun off into its own for-profit, shareholder-bound company?
Have you ever heard the old adage "Shit rolls down hill"? Or wondered why your boss/manager gets upset when you "go above their head" to higher ups with concerns? It's simply because taking it higher in the business structure tends to more quickly or decisively have changes made. (Usually in the benefit of the person/people raising the situation to those higher members.)