> From: Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > How can that be? The person who placed that material there must be > authorized by Wizards to enter into contracts on their behalf, or else > Wizards could simply turn around and say _nothing_ is Open Content.
You have to look at the intent. Wizards is on record releasing the general contents of the SRD as OGC. It would be impossible for them to demonstrate at this late date, after running articles in their house organ, posting entire web sites on their internet servers, and hosting panels at their own conventions, in addition to the reams of correspondance issued from "wizards.com" addresses all asserting such intent and detailing exactly who, what and how the release was to be managed, to claim that they did not make an authorized release of that material in general. On the other hand, an obvious, accidental inclusion in one (or a handful) of places of a term that they are also clearly on record as saying would >not< be licensed as OGC gives them all the ammo they would need to prevail at court in an attempt to squash that material's use. The >policy< of the copyright owner (WotC) was not to make that material OGC, ergo, it is >impossible< for the person who published it to have done so with proper authority. Remember: The point of the OGL is to reduce the threat of litigation to the lowest point possible when using other people's game content. Taking something from a document that has been demonstrably released in error that you >know< is likely to cause you troubles and using it anyway defeats the whole purpose of the OGL. Ryan _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
