<<Furthermore, if there is no 3rd type of content within a covered work,
then it becomes much trickier to sensibly chop a work up into lots of
little pieces. Let's say you have a chapter of feats, and all the feat
names are PI, and all the feat mechanics are OGC, and nothing has been
said about the flavor text describing the feats. Is it sensible to refer
to what is essentially every other paragraph of a chapter as "a work",
in the vein of copyright definitions? If not, then maybe you really
can't chop things up that way.
>>
What is an isn't a work is a matter of fact-based inquiry, so I might come up with a fact pattern where every other paragraph is a work. However, for every instance I come up with that, 99 others won't be situations where every other paragraph constitutes a work.
That's why I tend to refer to examples of magazines and articles, where a magazine is a collected work (per Title 17) that contains other independently copyrightable sub works (per Title 17). There, it is clear to me, that you can apply the OGL to a work, and that an article is a work, and that there is no requirement in the OGL that the OGL must apply to a collected work just because a sub-work is covered.
<<
but i'm not yet convinced that, should it>>
ever come down to a court to decide, that that third type is actually in
the license.
And when I read, "OGC means any work covered by the license excluding Product Identity", then it seems very much like it doesn't exist IN the covered work, even if it can exist in an encompassing work which is not a "covered work" in terms of the license.
Lee
_______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list Ogf-l@mail.opengamingfoundation.org http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
