Jason Lotito wrote:
> When in truth, what the OGL is just legalizing what millions of players do
> when the create their own spells for a game. Gamers had the idea long
> before the GNU came along, they just gave a name to it.
Oh, and made it so you can take that idea, sell it, get some cash for "free"
muchies, and not worry about getting suied... plus, maybe get your name in the
next PH.
> > So, you're telling me, that if I put in 2 days of work on maps alone in
> CC2
> > (which is not "easy" in any sense, 48 hours of mapping can make your eyes
> > bleed searching for leaking multipolys), another 7 days of writing up the
> > background, plot, and flavor text, then take 5 more days adding in all the
> > appropriate statistics for the creatures (and rules needed, plus
> references
> > to various books), THEN I spend another 3 days proofreading, editing, and
> > doing layout . . . after ALL THAT, I'm a leech if I don't open up my
> > product?
>
> No, I never said that. In fact, you can do that. The problem is using OGC
> material in products like that.
But, by using OGC material he focuses on the cool stuff and not duplicating
what's been done--and so, by "leeching" the gamers get a better product.
win-win.
> d20 and OGL are two seperate things, like GNU. Like Linux. Before you go
> bashing the OGL, please, at least learn what the goal is.
>
> Your views, while justified, are not what the OGL is about. I look at it as
> a way to protect my works while at the same time allowing people to use it
> and expand on it.
Wait, stop... will the listmember who thinks the OGL is anything BUT a way for
game designers and module writers to make money on an "open game" idea please
stand up? I think the argument went on without you....
DM
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
