On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 09:43:09 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > If you license artwork using a non-OGL license, and you publish it > in an OGL'd work should you: > > a) declare it as the licensor's PI (on the grounds that the owner > has given you the implied authority to note that their product is > protected) > > b) note that it is outside the scope of the license since you are > neither the owner of the art and you are also do not possess the > rights to declare it as OGC > > The OGL seems to require that the owner of the PI carry out the PI > declaration, but the general question is whether someone acting on > behalf of the owner, directly or indirectly as the agent of the PI > owner, can make the PI declaration.
Those who believe in closed content that's neither PI nor OGC can exclude artwork from the OGC. Those who don't would have to have the owner of the artwork put a PI declaration within the publisher of the work's own OGC/PI declarations; they couldn't merely declare it outside of the scope of the OGL, since they don't believe there is such a thing. Spike Y Jones _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
