Editing Open Game License (section)

== Reception ==

=== Open Game License ===
Those individuals, groups and publishing companies that license their works under the OGL and similar documents are sometimes collectively referred to as the "[[open gaming]] movement".<ref>{{cite web |last=Wizards of the Coast |author-link=Wizards of the Coast |date=2004-01-26 |title=The Open Gaming Foundation: Frequently Asked Questions |url=http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/oglfaq/20040123e |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20040407181800/http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/oglfaq/20040123e |archive-date=April 7, 2004 |access-date=2008-02-26}}</ref> The OGL led to the development of the stand-alone ''[[Pathfinder Roleplaying Game]]'' which is a modified version of the 3.5 game.<ref name="Baichtal">{{cite web |last=Baichtal |first=John |date=March 25, 2008 |title=No D&D 4E for Paizo?!? |url=https://www.wired.com/geekdad/2008/03/no-dd-4e-for-pa/ |access-date=October 1, 2013 |work=Wired.com |publisher=Conde Nast |archive-date=July 17, 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120717020004/http://www.wired.com/geekdad/2008/03/no-dd-4e-for-pa |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name=":0" /> James Maliszewski, for ''[[The Escapist (magazine)|The Escapist]]'', commented that the OGL also helped launch the [[Old School Revival]] movement and that "by 2002, the idea of using the SRD to reverse engineer the out-of-print ''AD&D'' took root on Dragonsfoot and other old school forums".<ref name=":40">{{Cite web |last=Maliszewski |first=James |date=August 20, 2009 |title=Full Circle: A History of the Old School Revival |url=https://www.escapistmagazine.com/full-circle-a-history-of-the-old-school-revival/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210922014251/https://www.escapistmagazine.com/full-circle-a-history-of-the-old-school-revival/ |archive-date=September 22, 2021 |access-date=January 28, 2023 |website=The Escapist |language=en-US}}</ref> Academics Benoît Demil and Xavier Lecocq, in the economic journal ''Revue d'économie industrielle'' in 2014, stated that the OGL had an immediate impact on the tabletop role-playing industry with an increase in new TTRP publications where the "majority of the new entrants adopted" the d20 license; d20 products sold at a higher rate than non-d20 products until the mid 2000s.<ref name=":10" /> It "was considered by WOTC's managers as a huge success due to the large movement of adoption it created among publishers".<ref name=":10" /> They also highlighted that the "success was amplified by the rise of electronic publishing".<ref name=":10" /> Christopher B. Seaman and Thuan Tran, for the academic journal ''[[Iowa Law Review]]'' in 2022, also highlighted that the release of the OGL "created a major shift in the RPG industry" and "led to a boom in the RPG industry in the early 2000s".<ref name=":9">{{Cite journal |last1=Seaman |first1=Christopher B. |last2=Tran |first2=Thuan |date=2022 |title=Intellectual Property and Tabletop Games |url=https://ilr.law.uiowa.edu/print/volume-107-issue-4/intellectual-property-and-tabletop-games/ |journal=[[Iowa Law Review]] |volume=107 |issue=4 |pages=1615–1683 |access-date=December 21, 2022 |archive-date=January 11, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230111112235/https://ilr.law.uiowa.edu/print/volume-107-issue-4/intellectual-property-and-tabletop-games/ |url-status=live }}</ref> They commented that "the emergence of open source licensing for RPGs facilitates user creativity and innovation, as dozens of ''D&D''-compatible supplements have been created under the Open Game License".<ref name=":9" />

Kit Walsh, a senior staff attorney at the [[Electronic Frontier Foundation]] in 2023, highlighted that roleplaying games have aspects that are copyrightable, such as creative expression, and aspects that are not, such as functional descriptions of game mechanics. Walsh commented that the original OGL "is very narrow" and includes "elements that are not copyrightable in the first place" – agreeing to the OGL "almost certainly means you have {{Sic|''fewer''}} rights to use elements of Dungeons and Dragons than you would otherwise. For example, absent this agreement, you have a legal right to create a work using noncopyrightable elements of D&D or making fair use of copyrightable elements".<ref name=":22">{{Cite web |last=Walsh |first=Kit |date=2023-01-10 |title=Beware the Gifts of Dragons: How D&D's Open Gaming License May Have Become a Trap for Creators |url=https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/01/beware-gifts-dragons-how-dds-open-gaming-license-may-have-become-trap-creators |access-date=2023-01-11 |website=Electronic Frontier Foundation |language=en |archive-date=January 12, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230112003746/https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/01/beware-gifts-dragons-how-dds-open-gaming-license-may-have-become-trap-creators |url-status=live }}</ref> However, Walsh highlights the "primary benefit" is knowing the exact terms in order to not be sued by Wizards of the Coast and avoiding "having to prove your fair use rights or engage in an expensive legal battle over copyrightability in court".<ref name=":22" /> Walsh stated that "open licenses can involve a lot of legalese that makes them hard for a layperson to understand" and explained that "perpetual" and "irrevocable" are separate legal terms; while the OGL states it is perpetual, it does not state that it is irrevocable.<ref name=":22" /> In an update to the article, Walsh wrote that past statements by Wizards of the Coast make "very clear that Wizards always thought of this as a contract with obligations for both sides [...]. Unlike a bare license without consideration, an offer to contract like this cannot be revoked unilaterally once it has been accepted, under the law of [[Washington (state)|Washington]] (where they are located) and other states". Walsh stated that works already published "under OGL 1.0a are entitled to the benefit Wizards of the Coast promised them under that contract. But Wizards can revoke the offer of the OGL 1.0a as to new potential users who haven't yet accepted its terms".<ref name=":22" /> Kyle Orland, for ''[[Ars Technica]]'', highlighted Walsh's analysis and commented that the "legal situation is complicated a bit [...] by Section 9" of the original OGL as that clause states third party designers can "use any authorized version of this License to copy, modify and distribute any Open Game Content originally distributed under any version of this License".<ref name=":25">{{Cite web |last=Orland |first=Kyle |date=2023-01-11 |title=RPG fans irate as D&D tries to shut its "open" game license |url=https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2023/01/rpg-fans-irate-as-dd-tries-to-shut-its-open-game-license/ |access-date=2023-01-12 |website=Ars Technica |language=en-us |archive-date=January 12, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230112004242/https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2023/01/rpg-fans-irate-as-dd-tries-to-shut-its-open-game-license/ |url-status=live }}</ref> Orland stated that Section 9 coupled with statements made by Wizards of the Coast in the original 2001 FAQ, seem "to suggest that companies could continue using the old license to make products based on the old ruleset that was published under OGL v1.0a (even if upcoming rules changes are covered more directly by OGL v1.1)".<ref name=":25" />

=== Leaked OGL1.1 draft ===
In November 2022, ''[[Game Rant]]'' commented that "many players are not happy with the implication" of the OGL discontinuation rumor as "tons of creators and companies have made their living on selling third-party ''Dungeons and Dragons'' homebrew. If Wizards of the Coast does not use the OGL in ''One D&D'', many of these creators will be unable to make content for the evergreen system–or will at least have to tiptoe around the law by only using the ''5th Edition'' SRD to do so".<ref name=":2" /> ''[[ComicBook.com]]'' highlighted that "while not creating a new System Reference Document for One D&D wouldn't snuff out third-party material, it would certainly discourage publishing or force publishers to turn to the DMs Guild" which "uses a separate license" and requires a 50% cut of the proceeds.<ref name=":3" />

Following the statement released by Wizards of the Coast in December 2022, Christian Hoffer, for ''ComicBook.com'', wrote: "Wizards noted that this royalty should impact less than 20 'creators,' which include major publishing companies like [[Kobold Press]] and Ghostfire Gaming".<ref name=":6" /> Chase Carter, for ''[[Dicebreaker]]'', commented that "this vision of an updated OGL paves a path for Wizards of the Coast to muscle in on ultra-successful crowdfunding projects without crushing existing communities, which the blog post says are 'a critical part of the D&D experience'. It also said existing virtual tabletop agreements will not be affected by whatever shape the OGL takes, even though the company has announced their own version to launch close to OneD&D's release in 2024".<ref>{{Cite web |date=December 21, 2022 |title=OneD&D's open gaming licence will introduce royalties for biggest creators, prevent third-party NFTs |url=https://www.dicebreaker.com/categories/roleplaying-game/news/dungeons-and-dragons-onednd-updates-ogl-srd |access-date=December 21, 2022 |website=Dicebreaker |language=en |archive-date=December 21, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221221193716/https://www.dicebreaker.com/categories/roleplaying-game/news/dungeons-and-dragons-onednd-updates-ogl-srd |url-status=live }}</ref>

Lin Codega, for ''Io9'' on January 5, 2023, wrote that "by ending the original OGL, many licensed publishers will have to completely overhaul their products and distribution in order to comply with the updated rules. Large publishers who focus almost exclusively on products based on the original OGL, including [[Paizo]], [[Kobold Press]], and [[Green Ronin Publishing|Green Ronin]], will be under pressure to update their business model incredibly fast".<ref name=":13" /> Codega highlighted that "if the original license is in fact no longer viable, every single licensed publisher will be affected by the new agreement, because every commercial creator will be asked to report their products, new and old, to Wizards of the Coast. [...] The main takeaway from the leaked OGL 1.1 draft document is that WotC is keeping power close at hand. [...] There are a lot of implications in this extended policy, and the ramifications of this updated OGL could have a chilling effect on new licensed products".<ref name=":13" /> Eric Law, for ''Game Rant'', commented that this leak was causing "panic" among third-party publishers.<ref name=":17">{{Cite web |last=Law |first=Eric |date=2023-01-05 |title=Dungeons and Dragons: Leaked OGL Reveals Plans for Homebrew in One D&D |url=https://gamerant.com/dungeons-dragons-leaked-open-game-license-homebrew-crackdown-one-dd/ |access-date=2023-01-06 |website=Game Rant |language=en |archive-date=January 6, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230106020828/https://gamerant.com/dungeons-dragons-leaked-open-game-license-homebrew-crackdown-one-dd/ |url-status=live }}</ref> Law stated that "the most concerning section of the legal document adds that Wizards of the Coast has full rights to any content created by the OGL. This would allow ''Dungeons and Dragons'' to take any homebrew content and publish it in official ''Dungeons and Dragons'' material without permission or compensation to the original creator".<ref name=":17" /> ''[[ICv2]]'' commented that the leaked OGL has several controversial parts including prohibiting "commercial publication for virtual tabletop platforms" and that while it "grants ownership of the OGL works to their creator" it also "gives WotC the perpetual, irrevocable right to use their works in any way it sees fit without payment".<ref name=":23">{{Cite web |date=January 11, 2023 |title='Dungeons & Dragons' OGL 1.1 Furor |url=https://icv2.com/articles/news/view/53040/dungeons-dragons-ogl-1-1-furor |access-date=January 11, 2023 |website=[[ICv2]] |language=en |archive-date=January 11, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230111092439/https://icv2.com/articles/news/view/53040/dungeons-dragons-ogl-1-1-furor |url-status=live }}</ref>

Christian Hoffer, for ''ComicBook.com'' in January 2023, stated that "if the OGL viewed by io9 is indeed the final OGL planned for ''One D&D'', it would have seismic consequences for the thriving ecosystem that surrounds ''Dungeons & Dragons''".<ref name=":18">{{Cite web |date=January 5, 2023 |title=Dungeons & Dragons Looks to Clamp Down on Competition With New OGL |url=https://comicbook.com/gaming/news/dungeons-dragons-ogl-one-dnd-leak-kickstarter/ |access-date=January 5, 2023 |website=ComicBook.com |language=en |archive-date=January 6, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230106021824/https://comicbook.com/gaming/news/dungeons-dragons-ogl-one-dnd-leak-kickstarter/ |url-status=live }}</ref> Hoffer highlighted the debate on if the OGL could be deauthorized and commented that regardless, "the intent of the new OGL is to force publishers to comply with the new OGL, with its easily revocable status and its tiered royalty structure".<ref name=":18" /> Charlie Hall, for ''[[Polygon (website)|Polygon]]'', commented that "if enforced as written, io9 reports, it could put revenue streams for companies like Pathfinder maker Paizo, Kobold Press, Green Ronin, and others in jeopardy".<ref name=":14">{{Cite web |last=Hall |first=Charlie |date=2023-01-05 |title=D&D's stricter licensing rules might impact some beloved RPGs |url=https://www.polygon.com/23540640/dnd-ogl-1-1-leak-dungeons-dragons-pathfinder-2e-wotc-hasbro |access-date=2023-01-06 |website=Polygon |language=en-US |archive-date=January 6, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230106015656/https://www.polygon.com/23540640/dnd-ogl-1-1-leak-dungeons-dragons-pathfinder-2e-wotc-hasbro |url-status=live }}</ref> Hall also highlighted that [[Kickstarter]] negotiated with Wizards of the Coast to lower the royalty amount for creators who use their platform. Hall wrote, "Kickstarter has recently seen increased competition from alternate crowdfunding outlets, including Gamefound and Backerkit. A partnership such as this, formally enshrined into the OGL 1.1, would encourage the largest D&D crowdfunding campaigns to use Kickstarter’s services".<ref name=":14" />

In the days following the leak, ''[[IGN]]'',<ref>{{Cite web |last=Northup |first=Travis |date=2023-01-06 |title=Wizards of the Coast OGL Change Draws Ire From Creators and Fans Alike: 'It's Not Right' |url=https://www.ign.com/articles/wizards-of-the-coasts-new-dungeons-dragons-license-ogl-controversy |access-date=2023-01-10 |website=IGN |language=en |archive-date=January 12, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230112125127/https://www.ign.com/articles/wizards-of-the-coasts-new-dungeons-dragons-license-ogl-controversy |url-status=live }}</ref> ''[[Vice (magazine)|Vice]]'',<ref>{{Cite web |date=January 12, 2023 |title=Dungeons and Dragons Is Jeopardizing Its Greatest Strength: Its Ubiquity |url=https://www.vice.com/en/article/dungeons-and-dragons-is-jeopardizing-its-greatest-strength-its-ubiquity/ |access-date=January 12, 2023 |website=Vice.com |language=en |archive-date=January 12, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230112140313/https://www.vice.com/en/article/3ad9kn/dungeons-and-dragons-is-jeopardizing-its-greatest-strength-its-ubiquity |url-status=live }}</ref> ''[[The Guardian]]'',<ref name=":26">{{Cite web |date=January 13, 2023 |title='People are leaving the game': Dungeons & Dragons fans revolt against new restrictions |url=https://www.theguardian.com/games/2023/jan/12/dungeons-and-dragons-wizards-of-the-coast-ogl |access-date=January 13, 2023 |website=[[The Guardian]] |language=en |archive-date=January 13, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230113061242/https://www.theguardian.com/games/2023/jan/12/dungeons-and-dragons-wizards-of-the-coast-ogl |url-status=live }}</ref> ''[[Financial Times]]''<ref>{{Cite news |date=January 13, 2023 |title=Dungeons & Dragons & fear & loathing |work=Financial Times |url=https://www.ft.com/content/b8f27121-ac91-45c8-9f4d-7a1d86115c19 |url-status=bot: unknown |access-date=January 13, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230113112621/https://www.ft.com/content/b8f27121-ac91-45c8-9f4d-7a1d86115c19 |archive-date=January 13, 2023 }}</ref> and many other industry focused outlets reported on negative reactions from both fans and professional content creators.<ref name=":23" /><ref>{{Cite web |last=Nattrass |first=J. J. |date=2023-01-09 |title=D&D content creators outraged over licensing changes, demand the game remain "open" |url=https://www.nme.com/en_asia/news/gaming-news/dd-content-creators-outraged-over-licensing-changes-demand-the-game-remain-open-3377607 |access-date=2023-01-10 |website=NME |language=en |archive-date=January 12, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230112040950/https://www.nme.com/en_asia/news/gaming-news/dd-content-creators-outraged-over-licensing-changes-demand-the-game-remain-open-3377607 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name=":20">{{Cite web |last=Plante |first=Corey |title=D&D's community is up in arms over a controversial change |url=https://www.inverse.com/gaming/dnd-dungeons-dragons-ogl-11-homebrew-changes-opendnd |access-date=2023-01-10 |website=Inverse |language=en |archive-date=January 13, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230113022546/https://www.inverse.com/gaming/dnd-dungeons-dragons-ogl-11-homebrew-changes-opendnd |url-status=live }}</ref> ''ComicBook.com'' reported that it had "spoken with over 20 small to mid-sized creators who have said that in-progress projects set to be published under the OGL have been placed on hold due to" the terms in the leak.<ref name=":19" /> Many designers had also reported considering switching role-playing game systems entirely.<ref name=":19" /> As part of a grassroots campaign protesting against the reported terms of the new OGL,<ref name=":21">{{Cite web |date=January 9, 2023 |title=Thousands Sign Open Letter Protesting Reported Restrictions in New Dungeons & Dragons OGL |url=https://comicbook.com/gaming/news/dungeons-dragons-ogl-open-letter-backlash-outrage-one-dnd/ |access-date=2023-01-10 |website=ComicBook.com |language=en |quote=Editor's Note: as of 5 PM ET on January 9th, over 15,000 people had signed |archive-date=January 10, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230110032823/https://comicbook.com/gaming/news/dungeons-dragons-ogl-open-letter-backlash-outrage-one-dnd/ |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Anderson |first=Julia |date=2023-01-09 |title=Dungeons & Dragons Fans Rally Behind #OpenDnD, Demanding WotC Revoke OGL 1.1 |url=https://www.cbr.com/dnd-fans-demand-opendnd-wotc-revoke-new-ogl/ |access-date=2023-01-10 |website=CBR |language=en |archive-date=January 10, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230110033438/https://www.cbr.com/dnd-fans-demand-opendnd-wotc-revoke-new-ogl/ |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=2023-01-09 |title=Indie TTRPG Creators Sign OGL 1.1 Open Letter |url=https://techraptor.net/tabletop/news/indie-ttrpg-creators-sign-ogl-11-open-letter |access-date=2023-01-10 |website=TechRaptor |language=en |archive-date=January 10, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230110162105/https://techraptor.net/tabletop/news/indie-ttrpg-creators-sign-ogl-11-open-letter |url-status=live }}</ref> over {{As of|2023|01|13|alt=66,000}} people have signed the "#OpenDND" internet petition within days of its launch.<ref name=":26" /><ref>{{Cite web |last=Silberling |first=Amanda |date=January 12, 2023 |title=Dungeons & Dragons content creators are fighting to protect their livelihoods |url=https://techcrunch.com/2023/01/12/dungeons-and-dragons-ogl-wizards-of-the-coast/ |access-date=January 12, 2023 |website=TechCrunch |language=en-US |quote=More than 54,000 people have signed an open letter against these changes as part of a movement called #OpenDND, organized by Mage Hand Press editor-in-chief Mike Holik |archive-date=January 12, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230112172002/https://techcrunch.com/2023/01/12/dungeons-and-dragons-ogl-wizards-of-the-coast/ |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Abbott |first=Benjamin |date=January 10, 2023 |title=More than 26,000 people sign open letter condemning new D&D license |url=https://www.gamesradar.com/more-than-26000-people-sign-open-letter-condemning-new-dandd-license/ |access-date=January 11, 2023 |website=gamesradar |language=en |quote=An open letter criticizing the new, rumored D&D license (known as the Open Game License, or OGL 1.1) has garnered more than 26,000 signatures in the last two days. |archive-date=January 10, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230110211513/https://www.gamesradar.com/more-than-26000-people-sign-open-letter-condemning-new-dandd-license/ |url-status=live }}</ref> This included "several well-known D&D community members" such as "''[[Baldur's Gate: Descent into Avernus]]'' writer M.T. Black, prominent D&D streamer Mark Hulmes (who recently ran a streaming show for Wizards of the Coast on [[List of Dungeons & Dragons web series|D&D's streaming channel]]), and Mike Shea, publisher of ''Sly Flourish''".<ref name=":21" /> There was also an online movement to cancel subscriptions to [[D&D Beyond]];<ref>{{Cite web |date=January 13, 2023 |title=Dungeons & Dragons Fans Launch D&D Beyond Cancellation Campaign Over OGL Changes |url=https://comicbook.com/gaming/news/dungeons-dragons-ogl-dndbeyond-subscription-cancellation-page/ |access-date=January 13, 2023 |website=ComicBook.com |language=en |archive-date=January 13, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230113135533/https://comicbook.com/gaming/news/dungeons-dragons-ogl-dndbeyond-subscription-cancellation-page/ |url-status=live }}</ref> ''Io9'' reported that per their sources at Wizards "the result of these cancellations and their impact on the bottom line of Wizards of the Coast is not negligible" and led to scrambling by upper management "to adjust their messaging around the situation".<ref>{{Cite web |date=January 12, 2023 |title=Wizards of the Coast Cancels OGL Announcement After Online Ire |url=https://gizmodo.com/dungeons-dragons-ogl-announcement-wizards-of-the-coast-1849981365 |access-date=January 13, 2023 |website=Gizmodo |language=en |archive-date=January 12, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230112233743/https://gizmodo.com/dungeons-dragons-ogl-announcement-wizards-of-the-coast-1849981365 |url-status=live }}</ref> ''[[Starburst (magazine)|Starburst]]'' commented that "historically when the owners of ''Dungeons and Dragons'' attempt to restrict what people can do with the game, it leads to a boom in other tabletop roleplaying games. This is happening right now".<ref name=":24">{{Cite web |date=2023-01-10 |title=DUNGEONS & DRAGONS TV Show Announced Amid Controversy |url=https://www.starburstmagazine.com/dungeons-and-dragons-tv-show-announced-amid-controversy |access-date=2023-01-11 |website=STARBURST Magazine |language=en-GB |archive-date=January 11, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230111185059/https://www.starburstmagazine.com/dungeons-and-dragons-tv-show-announced-amid-controversy |url-status=live }}</ref> Both Kobold Press and [[MCDM Productions]] announced upcoming new tabletop RPG systems with both stating their respective systems would be open games.<ref name=":24" /><ref>{{Cite web |last=Law |first=Eric |date=2023-01-10 |title=Dungeons and Dragons Publisher Kobold Press Making New Roleplaying System |url=https://gamerant.com/dungeons-dragons-publisher-kobold-press-tabletop-roleplaying-system-black-flag/ |access-date=2023-01-11 |website=Game Rant |language=en |archive-date=January 11, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230111185050/https://gamerant.com/dungeons-dragons-publisher-kobold-press-tabletop-roleplaying-system-black-flag/ |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=January 10, 2023 |title=Matt Colville Announces Plans for New RPG as Dungeons & Dragons OGL Furor Continues |url=https://comicbook.com/gaming/news/dungeons-dragons-matt-colville-ttrpg-mcdm-productions/ |access-date=January 11, 2023 |website=ComicBook.com |language=en |archive-date=January 11, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230111025034/https://comicbook.com/gaming/news/dungeons-dragons-matt-colville-ttrpg-mcdm-productions/ |url-status=live }}</ref> [[Paizo]] then announced a new Open RPG Creative License (ORC), an open, perpetual, and irrevocable system-agnostic license, as a direct response to the reported changes to the OGL. They stated that the license would not be owned by Paizo or any RPG publisher, to protect against future attempts to modify or rescind it.<ref name=":02" /> Additional publishers, such as Kobold Press, [[Chaosium]], [[Green Ronin Publishing|Green Ronin]], Legendary Games, and Rogue Genius Games, stated they would join the ORC development process.<ref name=":02">{{Cite web |date=January 12, 2023 |title=Paizo Announces Its Own Gaming License Amid D&D OGL Controversy |url=https://gizmodo.com/paizo-wizards-of-the-coast-dnd-open-rpg-ogl-1-1-1849982443 |access-date=January 13, 2023 |website=Gizmodo |language=en |archive-date=January 13, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230113001955/https://gizmodo.com/paizo-wizards-of-the-coast-dnd-open-rpg-ogl-1-1-1849982443 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name=":110">{{Cite web |date=January 12, 2023 |title=Paizo Addresses Pathfinder's Future, Announces New System-Neutral Open RPG License |url=https://comicbook.com/gaming/news/paizo-addresses-pathfinders-future-announces-new-system-neutral-open-rpg-license/ |access-date=January 13, 2023 |website=[[ComicBook.com]] |language=en |archive-date=January 13, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230113012522/https://comicbook.com/gaming/news/paizo-addresses-pathfinders-future-announces-new-system-neutral-open-rpg-license/ |url-status=live }}</ref> Another initiative is from Free League Publishing, which announced two licenses, for its Year Zero game system and another for its upcoming fantasy RPG ''Dragonbane''.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Free League Publishing Announces Plans to Make Year Zero Open Gaming License After Dungeons & Dragons OGL Controversy |url=https://comicbook.com/gaming/news/free-league-publishing-ogl-year-zero-dragonbane-dungeons-dragons/ |access-date=2023-01-19 |website=GAMING |language=en |archive-date=January 19, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230119150148/https://comicbook.com/gaming/news/free-league-publishing-ogl-year-zero-dragonbane-dungeons-dragons/ |url-status=live }}</ref>

On January 13, 2023, Wizards issued a response via D&D Beyond; this response did not contain the updated OGL which will be released at a later date.<ref>{{Cite web |date=January 13, 2023 |title=An Update on the Open Game License (OGL) |url=http://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1423-an-update-on-the-open-game-license-ogl |access-date=January 13, 2023 |website=[[D&D Beyond]] |publisher=[[Wizards of the Coast]] |language=en-us |archive-date=January 13, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230113162049/https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1423-an-update-on-the-open-game-license-ogl |url-status=live }}</ref> The statement walked back several changes to the OGL such as removing the royalty structure and the license back language and indicated that other forms of expression, such as VTTs and livestreams, would not be impacted by the updated OGL.<ref name=":27">{{Cite web |date=January 13, 2023 |title=Dungeons & Dragons Releases Statement on New OGL, Retracts Royalties and License Back Language |url=https://comicbook.com/gaming/news/dungeons-dragons-ogl-statement-retracts-royalties-license-back-language-outrage/ |access-date=January 13, 2023 |website=ComicBook.com |language=en |archive-date=January 13, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230113164003/https://comicbook.com/gaming/news/dungeons-dragons-ogl-statement-retracts-royalties-license-back-language-outrage/ |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name=":28">{{Cite web |date=January 13, 2023 |title=Wizards of the Coast Breaks Their Silence on the Dungeons & Dragons OGL |url=https://gizmodo.com/dungeons-dragons-ogl-license-wizards-of-the-coast-wotc-1849985196 |access-date=January 13, 2023 |website=Gizmodo |language=en |archive-date=January 13, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230113162920/https://gizmodo.com/dungeons-dragons-ogl-license-wizards-of-the-coast-wotc-1849985196 |url-status=live }}</ref> ''ComicBook.com'' commented that this statement "did not address" the OGL deauthorization concerns.<ref name=":27" /> ''Io9'' believed that Wizards of the Coast could not back down completely, as the company has invested significant resources into their IP and "the suits in Hasbro will not allow" others freely use their brand and content.<ref name=":28" /> ''Io9'' described Wizards of the Coast as engaging in "incredible spin doctoring" to try to recover from the backlash.<ref name=":28" /> ''Polygon'' highlighted that "despite" the shift in direction by Wizards, Twitter reactions remain overwhelmingly negative; they also pointed out that much remains unknown including "how a near-final draft of the revised OGL got things so very, very wrong".<ref name=":29">{{Cite web |last=Hall |first=Charlie |date=January 13, 2023 |title=D&D maker backs off new licensing rules that led to fan revolt |url=https://www.polygon.com/23553669/dungeons-dragons-dnd-ogl-wizards-of-the-coast-licensing |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230113170706/https://www.polygon.com/23553669/dungeons-dragons-dnd-ogl-wizards-of-the-coast-licensing |archive-date=January 13, 2023 |access-date=January 13, 2023 |website=Polygon |language=en-US}}</ref>

=== Proposed OGL1.2 draft ===
Edwin Evans-Thirlwell, for ''[[The Washington Post]],'' wrote that "pushback from fans, who criticized WotC’s response as far from an apology and a dismissal of their legitimate concerns, led WotC to backpedal further. A second bulletin Wednesday [on January 18] included more details about the path forward, along with a mea culpa from [Kyle] Brink, the executive producer, on behalf of his team".<ref name=":32" /> Evans-Thirlwell highlighted the release of the proposed OGL 1.2 which will have open comment available for two weeks, however, "some say the damage is already done. [...] Whether you view the original OGL as a mystic talisman or smoke-and-mirrors, WotC appears to have committed an irreversible act of self-sabotage in trying to replace it — squandering the prestige accumulated over 20 years in a matter of weeks".<ref name=":32" /> Lin Codega, for ''Io9'', wrote that "the commitment to create an irrevocable license under the Creative Commons foundation seems like a good step towards making that happen, and it would not have occurred if ''Dungeons & Dragons'' creators, influencers, fans, and third party publishers had universally come together to reject the proposed OGL 1.1".<ref name=":31" /> They also highlighted that Wizards continues to have "a firm stance on bigoted and hateful content—something that people praised in the leaked draft".<ref name=":31" /> The proposed OGL1.2 would ban "harmful, discriminatory, or illegal content" which Codega views as a good idea, however, Codega commented "in the wake of ''[[Spelljammer: Adventures in Space|Spelljammer]]''<nowiki/>'s inclusion and public treatment of the [[Spelljammer: Adventures in Space#Hadozee|Hadozee]], it remains to be seen if ''D&D'' is even capable of moderating this kind of content in a way that will be respectful, inclusive, and progressive".<ref name=":31" />

Both Codega and Christian Hoffer, for ''ComicBook.com'', highlighted that the proposed OGL1.2 would de-authorize OGL1.0a.<ref name=":31" /><ref name=":30" /> Hoffer commented that de-authorization is "one major sticking point" as it is "seen as a hard line for many creators and third party publishers".<ref name=":30" /> Hoffer wrote that Brink framed de-authorization as necessary to enforce the "'No Hateful or Harmful Content' clause in the new OGL".<ref name=":30" /> Kyle Orland, for ''[[Ars Technica]]'', stated that "aside from the OGL v1.0a deauthorization, the new draft language scales back many of the most controversial portions of the original leaked update [...]. The new draft language also explicitly notes that the new license is 'perpetual, non-exclusive, and irrevocable,' with only a few technical sections being eligible for modification in the future".<ref>{{Cite web |last=Orland |first=Kyle |date=January 20, 2023 |title=D&D maker still wants to revoke earlier versions of "open" gaming license |url=https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2023/01/dd-maker-still-wants-to-revoke-earlier-versions-of-open-gaming-license/ |access-date=January 21, 2023 |website=[[Ars Technica]] |language=en-us |archive-date=January 21, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230121005202/https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2023/01/dd-maker-still-wants-to-revoke-earlier-versions-of-open-gaming-license/ |url-status=live }}</ref>

=== Creative Commons ===
On January 27, 2023, Wizards of the Coast outlined the feedback received from over 15,000 survey submissions during the open comment for OGL1.2:<ref name=":37">{{Cite web |date=January 27, 2023 |title=WotC Folds: OGL 1.0a Abides |url=https://icv2.com/articles/news/view/53178/wotc-folds-ogl-1-0a-abides |access-date=January 28, 2023 |website=[[ICv2]] |language=en |archive-date=January 28, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230128042027/https://icv2.com/articles/news/view/53178/wotc-folds-ogl-1-0a-abides |url-status=live }}</ref> "88% do not want to publish TTRPG content under OGL 1.2", "89% are dissatisfied with deauthorizing OGL 1.0a", "86% are dissatisfied with the draft VTT policy" and "62% are satisfied with including Systems Reference Document (SRD) content in Creative Commons, and the majority of those who were dissatisfied asked for more SRD content in Creative Commons".<ref name=":35">{{Cite web |last=Brink |first=Kyle |date=January 27, 2023 |title=OGL 1.0a & Creative Commons |url=http://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1439-ogl-1-0a-creative-commons |access-date=January 27, 2023 |website=[[D&D Beyond]] |language=en-us |type=[[Press release]] |archive-date=January 27, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230127201539/https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1439-ogl-1-0a-creative-commons |url-status=live }}</ref> As a result, Wizards decided to release the SRD 5.1 under an irrevocable [[Creative Commons license]]; it would also no longer attempt to deauthorize the OGL 1.0a.<ref name=":35" /><ref name=":34" /><ref name=":33" /> Milton Griepp, for ''ICv2'', reported that the events had led to an overwhelmingly negative response, constituting a PR disaster for Wizards of the Coast.<ref name=":37" /> Griepp commented that "it remains to be seen whether the steps WotC has taken will be sufficient to unwind the moves other companies have made to disassociate themselves from the OGL, most notably Paizo".<ref name=":37" />

Christian Hoffer, for ''ComicBook.com'', stated that "this is a major change of pace for Wizards of the Coast and seems to be a surprising end to a controversy that had raged for weeks, drawing attention from mainstream news sites. It's a huge victory for the wider D&D community".<ref name=":36" /> Charlie Hall, for ''Polygon'', also highlighted the major mainstream news coverage this controversy received and the possibility that it may have an impact on the success of upcoming film ''[[Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves]]'', scheduled for release in March 2023.<ref name=":33" /> Lin Codega, for ''Io9'' in January 2023, wrote that the deauthorization of the OGL 1.0a had been a hard line for many fans so "concessions Wizards and ''D&D'' make in this announcement are huge" and that "this is a huge victory for the fans".<ref name=":34" /> Codega highlighted Kyle Brink, Executive Producer for D&D, who stated "that putting the entire 400-page SRD into the Creative Commons means that fans don't need to 'take [''Dungeons & Dragons''’] word for it.' That Brink would explicitly acknowledge the lack of trust between fans and publishers and Wizards of the Coast is incredible".<ref name=":34" /> In May 2024, Lin Codega now of ''Rascal'' commented that it appeared the Open Game License would not return following Wizards of the Coast's announcement that the revised 5th Edition would have an SRD released under the Creative Commons – a move they considered both "fascinating" and "sad".<ref name=":12">{{Cite web |last=Codega |first=Lin |date=May 9, 2024 |title=The OGL is dead. Long live the OGL. |url=https://www.rascal.news/the-ogl-is-dead-long-live-the-ogl-dnd-5e/ |access-date=May 9, 2024 |website=Rascal News |language=en}}</ref> Codega opined: <blockquote>The Open Game License was genuinely a revolutionary contract—established two years before the Creative Commons license was developed—and tabletop games across the board, not just ''D&D,'' benefited from the free and unrestricted usage granted in the OGL. The OGL should have been the contract to stand the test of time as a testament to the power of open source licensing for intellectual property. But then, as with most good things that are given away in the spirit of joyous creativity and hope for community, capitalism happened. [...] The commitment to putting the updated ''D&D'' rules into the Creative Commons rather than trying to re-establish the OGL or even establish another GSL-alike is, in my opinion, a good decision.<ref name=":12" /></blockquote>