Brad Thompson wrote:
>
> > Doesn't this break the idea of being able to provide value add in
> > the form of artwork, typesetting, programs, and so on?
> >
> > What's the intent here, in any case?
>
> Not in the form of artwork & typesetting. What it DOES do is protect
> OGL authors from having their work co-opted by third parties and
> placed in a closed environment (software).
I didn't mean to imply that artwork and typesetting were "broken" by
this change. I considered software in the same category of artwork and
typesetting... value add that you can make money from. Taking software
out of the category make me wonder about the motivation.
What's the bad scenario that's prevented by the clause? (Non
rhetorical, serious question. :)
> > Does this mean that the software included with the D&D3 PHB will be
> > GPL'd?
>
> No. The D&D books are not OGL. They are D20 because D20 is a WotC
> trademark, so WotC is the only company who can choose to use the D20
> logo without using OGL.
See my other post from today, for my thoughts on that subject. :)
> > Has a lawyer looked at any incompatabilities between the GPL and the
> > OGL? The GPL has some interesting clauses about no futher
> > restrictions... which may prevent this.
>
> Good point.
Thanks.
[snip]
-Otto.
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
