Tim Dugger wrote:
Let's take a magazine as an example of my interpretation.
Using my interpretation, the whole magazine is covered by the
license. The magazine declares three articles as OGC. It then
declares the names of characters and place names used within the
articles as PI.
So what is the rest of the magazine? Under my interpretation, it is
non-open (closed) content (meaning that it cannot be re-used - even
through the fair use clauses available in copyright law if you are
using the OGL). It doesn't have to be declared because it is not
OGC, nor is it PI. It is the default state of content (caveat - content
based upon the SRD or other OGC works is automatically open, and
is required to be declared as such) within the covered work.
So, a magazine that has a single OGC-containing article coudn't use
trademarks anywhere in the magazine to indicate compatibility or
co-adaptability. It couldn't have an article in that issue about "New
Races for ShadowRun(tm)"?
Which points to some other problems with the WotC FAQs, and reasons why
i'm disinclined to accept any of their answers as being trustable.
Namely, they don't want you to be able to get around the restrictions by
breaking the content into two separate physical books which are sold
together as one economic unit. Which makes sense. But they've since
claimed that a "web enhancement" is just as much a part of the original
work as something that is physically bundled with it. Despite the fact
that it is freely available to people who don't have the physical work,
is perfectly useable without the physical work, and might enjoy a
separate copyright. Because, again, they don't want people to make an
end-run around the restrictions. Of course, if you have two
clearly-separate physical works, one of them could use the WotC OGL
and/or D20STL, and the other could not, and thereby
perfectly-legally--if somewhat awkwardly--perform that end-run they
don't want. And they've made it quite clear that they don't want to
prohibit a magazine having some WotC OGL-using articles, and some
"regular" articles. So, how do you set up a *consistent* set of rules
for defining "a work" that includes a boxed set or bundled books,
excludes books bundled together, includes a physical product and a
digital product that are explicitly designed to work together, excludes
two products that are designed to work together, includes a single
physical work made up of multiple logical works internally which may or
may not have separate copyrights, excludes a single physical work
comprised of multiple logical works internally which may or may not have
separate copyrights, and handles other format variations that haven't
actually been witnessed yet?
_______________________________________________
Ogf-l mailing list
Ogf-l@mail.opengamingfoundation.org
http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
