Thank you Ryan for clearing some of our thoughts up. I for one am feeling
much better about releasing d20 products after having read this.
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ryan S. Dancey
Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2000 10:40 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Open_Gaming] Clarification? OGL Modification Submission.
From: "Clark Peterson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> "We have the same freedom to use your work as you have
> to use ours. If we use your work, however, we cannot
> make it 'closed'; our version of your work must be
> covered by the OGL as well; therefore you in turn
> could use whatever we added to your original work
> without our permission in turn. And so forth."
That's not an infamous quote - that's the heart and soul of the entire
concept of Open Games - the right of >anyone< to copy, modify and distribute
Open Game Content without additional restriction. >Anyone< includes
>Wizards of the Coast< by definition.
> The new version of the license--in response to the
> scare this comment created--provides (as you point
> out) for identification of open content:
There was no new version of the license in response to any "scare". There
is a simplified version of the license because too many people found the
more precise language hard to understand and that reduced the utility value
of the license below a threshold I felt comfortable with.
The simplified version of the license provides for exactly the same ability
to copy, modify and distribute Open Game Content as all the previous
versions.
> That of course seems to conflict with the
> interpretation that anything we make is open.
That's because the interpretation is wrong. Anything you make is not open.
Anything you make that is your original, non-derived material is copyright
exclusively to you and is encumbered by no license. >YOU< have to take an
affirmative, informed step to place your original non-derivative material
under the Open Gaming License.
If you make a >derivative work< as that term is understood in copyright law,
you don't own any rights to it >anyway< regardless of the status of the OGL,
unless you created such a work under license in the first place.
If you make a >derivative work< based on Open Game Content, you must make
that derived work Open Game Content as well. But there is nothing in the
OGL which says a work must be wholly Open. You are free to mix and match
Open and Closed material at your whim, the sole requirement being that you
must identify which portions of the work are Open.
> "Open Document" means a derivative work containing
> Open Game Content published pursuant to this license.
> "Open Game Content" includes any content provided
> specifically for this purpose by WotC, or any content
> which has been specifically designated as Open Content
> by any Contributor under section 8 of this license.
> "Contributor" means any person publishing an Open
> Document pursuant to this license.
These are just definitions. They have no value within the context of the
license, and don't serve any legal purpose. And, at least in the first
case, the definition is >wrong<, because the term "derivitive work" assumes
the >entire work< will be derivative.
> "WotC agrees not to use non-Open Game Content from an
> Open Document in any manner without the prior written
> approval of the Contributor."
The >COPYRIGHT STATUTE< requires this, not the Open Gaming License. Nothing
WotC or anyone else could write into a license agreement could override the
law of the land, man! Nobody can take your original creative work and use
it without your permission.
Ryan
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
