<<To summarize, the OGC in a work published under the OGL consists of (all game
mechanics plus all work covered by the license) minus anything declared as PI.
This is why I say you pretty much can't publish game mechanics under the OGL
and keep them closed.
>>
But you can publish game mechanics in a volume that contains an OGL'd work where the game mechanics aren't released as OGC.
Consider that a magazine or other fanzines may have a single advertisement or article that is a covered work. The magazine as a whole is not a covered work. If the magazine has 10 articles, and only article 10 is a covered work, then the mechanics in articles 1 through 9 are not OGC, and they are not PI, since they do not appear in a covered work.
Note also that it doesn't say that mechanics are OGC. It says mechanics (in the covered work, since this license only applies to the work it covers) are open if they don't embody PI. Insofar as they do embody PI then the rules could be closed. Since PI can cover concepts and language, but only insofar as those can be owned, I suspect you could make a strong argument that if you had patented rules and copyrighted their verbatim _expression_ you could claim some ownership rights in one form or another to the concepts and the language associated with those rules and have some PI claims associated with the rules.
Lee
_______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
