On Thu, 19 Oct 2000, Faustus von Goethe wrote:
> >Steve hasn't said anything about preventing people from doing what the
> >license allows them to do. He's asking why he (or any other publisher)
> >should do the reverse engineering work that a database builder would need
> >to do to abstract the OGC parts from a complete product.
>
> As I said at the outset, and continue to maintain - there is one major
> reason. If someone else does it, they might do it wrong, and inadvertantly
> open up your PI. Now you might say "So I sue them" - but there is very
> rarely a winner in ANY lawsuit with the exception of the lawyers.
This is incorrect. They can't open up your PI. If they do, they are
required to fix the mistake or they will be forced to close down. And,
yes, there most certainly are winners in lawsuits besides the lawyers. As
you are likely to become aware should you inadvertently use WW/SSS PI in
your database and refuse to comply with their request to fix the
error. Their lawyers will win, your lawyer will win & they will win; you
will lose.
> Why do (ALL OF) you thing WotC is making an SRD, instead of just listing the
> stuff from the PHB that you can and can't use - so there is NO CONFUSION.
The PHB is not published under the OGL. They can't just list the material
in the PHB that is OGC because none of the material in the PHB is OGC.
They have to publish something using the OGL for there to be any OGC
material. That is why they are publishing the SRD. Without the SRD,
there is NO Dungeons & Dragons or D20 material available under the OGL to
build upon.
alec
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
