Cookie Consent by Free Privacy Policy Generator ๐Ÿ“Œ D&D Publisher Addresses Backlash Over Controversial License

๐Ÿ  Team IT Security News

TSecurity.de ist eine Online-Plattform, die sich auf die Bereitstellung von Informationen,alle 15 Minuten neuste Nachrichten, Bildungsressourcen und Dienstleistungen rund um das Thema IT-Sicherheit spezialisiert hat.
Ob es sich um aktuelle Nachrichten, Fachartikel, Blogbeitrรคge, Webinare, Tutorials, oder Tipps & Tricks handelt, TSecurity.de bietet seinen Nutzern einen umfassenden รœberblick รผber die wichtigsten Aspekte der IT-Sicherheit in einer sich stรคndig verรคndernden digitalen Welt.

16.12.2023 - TIP: Wer den Cookie Consent Banner akzeptiert, kann z.B. von Englisch nach Deutsch รผbersetzen, erst Englisch auswรคhlen dann wieder Deutsch!

Google Android Playstore Download Button fรผr Team IT Security



๐Ÿ“š D&D Publisher Addresses Backlash Over Controversial License


๐Ÿ’ก Newskategorie: IT Security Nachrichten
๐Ÿ”— Quelle: games.slashdot.org

An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: After a week of silence amid intense backlash, Dungeons & Dragons publisher Wizards of the Coast (WoTC) has finally addressed its community's concerns about changes to the open gaming license. The open gaming license (OGL) has existed since 2000 and has made it possible for a diverse ecosystem of third-party creators to publish virtual tabletop software, expansion books and more. Many of these creators can make a living thanks to the OGL. But over the last week, a new version of the OGL leaked after WoTC sent it to some top creators. More than 66,000 Dungeons & Dragons fans signed an open letter under the name #OpenDnD ahead of an expected announcement, and waves of users deleted their subscriptions to D&D Beyond, WoTC's online platform. Now, WoTC admitted that "it's clear from the reaction that we rolled a 1." Or, in non-Dungeons and Dragons speak, they screwed up. "We wanted to ensure that the OGL is for the content creator, the homebrewer, the aspiring designer, our players, and the community -- not major corporations to use for their own commercial and promotional purpose," the company wrote in a statement. But fans have critiqued this language, since WoTC -- a subsidiary of Hasbro -- is a "major corporation" in itself. Hasbro earned $1.68 billion in revenue during the third quarter of 2022. TechCrunch spoke to content creators who had received the unpublished OGL update from WoTC. The terms of this updated OGL would force any creator making more than $50,000 to report earnings to WoTC. Creators earning over $750,000 in gross revenue would have to pay a 25% royalty. The latter creators are the closest thing that third-party Dungeons & Dragons content has to "major corporations" -- but gross revenue is not a reflection of profit, so to refer to these companies in that way is a misnomer. [...] The fan community also worried about whether WoTC would be allowed to publish and profit off of third-party work without credit to the original creator. Noah Downs, a partner at Premack Rogers and a Dungeons & Dragons livestreamer, told TechCrunch that there was a clause in the document that granted WoTC a perpetual, royalty-free sublicense to all third-party content created under the OGL. Now, WoTC appears to be walking back both the royalty clause and the perpetual license. "What [the next OGL] will not contain is any royalty structure. It also will not include the license back provision that some people were afraid was a means for us to steal work. That thought never crossed our minds," WoTC wrote in a statement. "Under any new OGL, you will own the content you create. We won't." WoTC claims that it included this language in the leaked version of the OGL to prevent creators from being able to "incorrectly allege" that WoTC stole their work. Throughout the document, WoTC refers to the document that certain creators received as a draft -- however, creators who received the document told TechCrunch that it was sent to them with the intention of getting them to sign off on it. The backlash against these terms was so severe that other tabletop roleplaying game (TTRPG) publishers took action. Paizo is the publisher of Pathfinder, a popular game covered under WoTC's original OGL. Paizo's owner and presidents were leaders at Wizards of the Coast at the time that the OGL was originally published in 2000, and wrote in a statement yesterday that the company was prepared to go to court over the idea that WoTC could suddenly revoke the OGL license from existing projects. Along with other publishers like Kobold Press, Chaosium and Legendary Games, Paizo announced it would release its own Open RPG Creative License (ORC). "Ultimately, the collective action of the signatures on the open letter and unsubscribing from D&D Beyond made a difference. We have seen that all they care about is profit, and we are hitting their bottom line," said Eric Silver, game master of Dungeons & Dragons podcast Join the Party. He told TechCrunch that WoTC's response on Friday is "just a PR statement." "Until we see what they release in clear language, we can't let our foot off the gas pedal," Silver said. "The corporate playbook is wait it out until the people get bored; we can't and we won't."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

...



๐Ÿ“Œ D&D Publisher Addresses Backlash Over Controversial License


๐Ÿ“ˆ 77.02 Punkte

๐Ÿ“Œ Google Has a New Review Process For Handling Controversial Projects After Backlash Over Censored Search Product For China


๐Ÿ“ˆ 38.85 Punkte

๐Ÿ“Œ Despite backlash, Microsoft sticks with controversial โ€œGVFSโ€ name


๐Ÿ“ˆ 33.3 Punkte

๐Ÿ“Œ Twitch withdraws its latest controversial sexual content policy for NSFW streams after backlash


๐Ÿ“ˆ 33.3 Punkte

๐Ÿ“Œ Microsoft Sticks With Controversial 'GVFS' Name Despite Backlash


๐Ÿ“ˆ 33.3 Punkte

๐Ÿ“Œ Seattle To Remove Controversial City Spying Network After Public Backlash


๐Ÿ“ˆ 33.3 Punkte

๐Ÿ“Œ Vuln: Citrix License Server for Windows and License Server VPX CVE-2017-5571 Open Redirect Vulnerability


๐Ÿ“ˆ 23.83 Punkte

๐Ÿ“Œ Citrix License Server/License Server VPX up to 11.14.0.0 Crash denial of service


๐Ÿ“ˆ 23.83 Punkte

๐Ÿ“Œ Citrix Systems License Server for Windows und Citrix License Server VPX: Schwachstelle ermรถglicht Umgehen von Sicherheitsvorkehrungen


๐Ÿ“ˆ 23.83 Punkte

๐Ÿ“Œ How to add license and monitor license consumption in Kaspersky Endpoint Security Cloud


๐Ÿ“ˆ 23.83 Punkte

๐Ÿ“Œ Using Apache License and MIT License under the same project


๐Ÿ“ˆ 23.83 Punkte

๐Ÿ“Œ Citrix License Server for Windows/License Server VPX bis 11.14.0.0 Crash Denial of Service


๐Ÿ“ˆ 23.83 Punkte

๐Ÿ“Œ Citrix License Server for Windows/License Server VPX bis 11.14.0.0 Crash Denial of Service


๐Ÿ“ˆ 23.83 Punkte

๐Ÿ“Œ Oracle BI Publisher 11.1.1.7.0/11.1.1.9.0 BI Publisher Security privilege escalation


๐Ÿ“ˆ 23.67 Punkte

๐Ÿ“Œ Oracle BI Publisher 11.1.1.7.0 BI Publisher Security privilege escalation


๐Ÿ“ˆ 23.67 Punkte

๐Ÿ“Œ Oracle BI Publisher 11.1.1.7.0/11.1.1.9.0/12.2.1.1.0/12.2.1.2.0 BI Publisher Security privilege escalation


๐Ÿ“ˆ 23.67 Punkte

๐Ÿ“Œ Oracle BI Publisher 11.1.1.7.0/11.1.1.9.0/12.2.1.1.0/12.2.1.2.0 BI Publisher Security privilege escalation


๐Ÿ“ˆ 23.67 Punkte

๐Ÿ“Œ Oracle BI Publisher 11.1.1.7.0/11.1.1.9.0/12.2.1.2.0/12.2.1.3.0 BI Publisher Security privilege escalation


๐Ÿ“ˆ 23.67 Punkte

๐Ÿ“Œ Oracle BI Publisher (formerly XML Publisher) 11.1.1.9.0 Spring Framework information disclosure


๐Ÿ“ˆ 23.67 Punkte

๐Ÿ“Œ Oracle BI Publisher (formerly XML Publisher) 11.1.1.9.0 jackson-databind denial of service


๐Ÿ“ˆ 23.67 Punkte

๐Ÿ“Œ Oracle BI Publisher (formerly XML Publisher) 11.1.1.9.0 Apache Tomcat privilege escalation


๐Ÿ“ˆ 23.67 Punkte

๐Ÿ“Œ Oracle BI Publisher 12.2.1.3.0/12.2.1.4.0 BI Publisher Security cross site scripting


๐Ÿ“ˆ 23.67 Punkte

๐Ÿ“Œ Oracle BI Publisher 5.5.0.0.0/12.2.1.3.0/12.2.1.4.0 BI Publisher Security unknown vulnerability


๐Ÿ“ˆ 23.67 Punkte

๐Ÿ“Œ Oracle BI Publisher 5.5.0.0.0/11.1.1.9.0/12.2.1.3.0/12.2.1.4.0 BI Publisher Security unknown vulnerability


๐Ÿ“ˆ 23.67 Punkte

๐Ÿ“Œ Oracle BI Publisher 5.5.0.0.0/11.1.1.9.0/12.2.1.3.0/12.2.1.4.0 BI Publisher Security unknown vulnerability


๐Ÿ“ˆ 23.67 Punkte

๐Ÿ“Œ Oracle BI Publisher 5.5.0.0.0/11.1.1.9.0/12.2.1.3.0/12.2.1.4.0 BI Publisher Security Remote Privilege Escalation


๐Ÿ“ˆ 23.67 Punkte

๐Ÿ“Œ CVE-2019-0227 | Oracle BI Publisher 12.2.1.3.0/12.2.1.4.0 BI Publisher Security server-side request forgery


๐Ÿ“ˆ 23.67 Punkte

๐Ÿ“Œ CVE-2022-21523 | Oracle BI Publisher 12.2.1.3.0/12.2.1.4.0 BI Publisher Security information disclosure


๐Ÿ“ˆ 23.67 Punkte

๐Ÿ“Œ CVE-2019-2898 | Oracle BI Publisher 11.1.1.9.0/12.2.1.3.0/12.2.1.4.0 BI Publisher Security information disclosure


๐Ÿ“ˆ 23.67 Punkte

๐Ÿ“Œ Amazon Faces Backlash Over Removal Of Device Encryption


๐Ÿ“ˆ 23.23 Punkte

๐Ÿ“Œ Amazon Faces Backlash Over Removal Of Device Encryption


๐Ÿ“ˆ 23.23 Punkte

๐Ÿ“Œ Instacart Reverses Course After Backlash From Shoppers Over Plans To Elimanate Tips


๐Ÿ“ˆ 23.23 Punkte

๐Ÿ“Œ Instacart Reverses Course After Backlash From Shoppers Over Plans To Eliminate Tips


๐Ÿ“ˆ 23.23 Punkte











matomo