"'Open Game Content' means the game mechanic and includes the methods, procedures, processes and routines to the extent such content does not embody the Product Identity and is an enhancement over the prior art and any additional content clearly identified as Open Game Content by the Contributor, and means any work covered by this License, including translations and derivative works under copyright law, but specifically excludes Product Identity."
OK, so let's dissect this with an example. I have a work of fiction that I'm going to apply to the OGL. It contains no game mechanics. This shortens the effective definition to:
"'Open Game Content' means any additional content clearly identified as Open Game Content by the Contributor, and means any work covered by this License, including translations and derivative works under copyright law, but specifically excludes Product Identity."
Next, its not a derivative work or a translation. This shortens the definition to:
"'Open Game Content' means any additional content clearly identified as Open Game Content by the Contributor, and means any work covered by this License, but specifically excludes Product Identity."
Let's say there's no Product Identity. Well the definition shortens to:
"'Open Game Content' means any additional content clearly identified as Open Game Content by the Contributor, and means any work covered by this License."
At this point OGC means two things:
1) anything I mark as OGC, AND
2) the work covered by the license
Since Section #8 requires me to mark all my OGC, I have to mark it so that both of the above are true, in order to fulfill the definition.
part 1 of the remainder of the OGC definition is automatically fulfilled by Section #8.
So now I have to make Section #8 work with part 2 of the remaining OGC definition:
I have to mark "the work covered by the License" as OGC.
If you want to give effect to the phrase that "OGC means the work covered by the License" there is only one obvious reading. You can't just nay-say this out of existence.
If you are looking for a counter-argument you'd have to argue about the definition of the word "covered". I think it's self-explanatory, but since it ain't defined, if there's any wiggle room for a conclusion opposite to my own, it would have to leverage the phrase "covered" somehow to be construed as an alternate possibly valid alternative.
Currently Tim and Clark keep saying that they don't agree, but they haven't posted any interpretation which gives effect to "OGC means any work covered by the License". I don't think any nay-saying is a valid critique until it presents a reasonable interpretation of this part of the License.
Lee
_______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list Ogf-l@mail.opengamingfoundation.org http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
