The official website and community for Foundry Virtual Tabletop.
IFollowing the OGL 1.2 announcement, FoundryVTT has made a statement about it, which I recommend reading. It is a thorough list of some of the major issues with this new draft, some of which I hadn’t even noticed. They mentioned on Discord they are getting legal counselling, so this information is very reliable. Here’s a summary of the points they have made:
The new OGL applies to people who may continue to publish content they had made based on the 1.0a OGL, which applies to projects that were developed before the new OGL’s announcement.
The license says irrevocable, but they actually have ways to revoke it, including “whether they find a part of the license to be unenforceable”. I thought this meant on an individual basis, but it actually affects to the entirety of the new OGL. Which, yeah, it gives them a way to revoke it.
Any IP infringement means an immediate termination instead of a 30 days period to potentially fix it (which was given in the original OGL).
I’ll copypaste this one: “ Creators using OGL 1.2 waive all right to participate in class, collective, or joint action. Wizards of the Coast may take legal action against creators individually without the possibility for peers in the industry who would also be affected by such a ruling to participate or aid in that legal action. “
Since it’s separate from the OGL, this one is up to change whenever, revocable: Whatever they want to do.
There’s that whole “animation” segment. I have commented this one already. WOTC wants to ensure they can eliminate competition by deciding what is actually “valid” as a VTT, and animation is one thing they are disallowing. It means WOTC may decide arbitrarily which functions are allowed in a VTT: Is dynamic lighting too much? Up to them.
This was never about NFTs despite how they pulled said buzzword. Again, Hasbro has done NFTs themselves.
The old OGL covered a plethora of formats, which are much more limited under this new OGL. The old OGL was meant to cover a lot of formats. It was explained in their FAQs, too. This is a massive change (for the worst).
Now, WOTC says there is a will to maintain a conversation, but this has not been entirely true. Surveys are the perfect place to channel feedback and use it however you want, without letting affected parties make a point. Even much before the OGL, FVTT’s team has been trying to contact WOTC and obtain a license akin to roll20′s, which WOTC has never even cared to reply. A conversation is something meant to go both ways.
Foundry is my VTT of choice. It was initially developed by a very small amount of people, and now they are a team of ~10, who have done a marvellous job. The VTT itself can be bought with a single payment, which includes the entirety of the software (with no paywalled functions), as well as access to modules. For those unfamiliar, think of videogame mods. FVTT is open for people to code anything they’d like to add, and offer it to the community, which means the possibilities are almost endless. And a vast majority of modules are completely free, which means you can enhance a (really good) software even further.
Of course, all of that sits badly with WOTC, who is eager to add “recurrent spending, like in videogames” (according to their CEO) to their products. Subscription services, microtransactions. Maybe put ads in there too.
I am bringing this up not because of some sort of sponsor. I legitimately love FVTT and it changed my experience as a player. This is one of the many things affected by this new OGL, and WOTC’s intention is none other than remove competition through dubiously legal methods.
