From: "Bryce Harrington" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sorry - you lost me there.
>
> FAQ # A.05
Sorry - you're referring to an unofficial and unendorsed FAQ which I have no
interest in formally supporting. I wouldn't be able to comment one way or
the other on anything it contains.
> Heh, then you get into circular logic with the "Why not use the GNU FDL"
> again.
The GNU FDL is even more of a mess of legalese than the Open Game License
is. We're having problems with people understanding parts of the OGL like
"clearly identified". Using the FDL is just asking for even more trouble.
The FDL also has a very, very challenging time supporting mixed works that
combine Open content with non-Open content (which is not necessarily the
same thing as Product Identity, though the two concepts overlap to some
degree). The FDL is, in my opinion, a license that is simply not suitable
for publishing a modern, commercial RPG, though it might work great for
other sorts of games.
Remember, the stated purpose of the FDL is to provide good, Free
documentation for Free software projects. Anything else published using it
is a happy, though unintentional side-effect of that effort.
But I digress.
> Okay, so correct me if I'm wrong, but... Isn't the purpose of the OGL
> to help me *avoid* running afoul of copyright law?
YES. It creates a safe harbor in a storm-tossed sea of litigation, threats
of litigation, and an industry rife with a history of litigation.
> Now, I don't think people plan to actually use or derive directly
> from D&D materials
You think wrong. It's easily the #1 question I get: "What parts of
Dungeons & Dragons use the Open Gaming License?" Followed closely by "Is
the Psionics Book covered by the Open Game License?"
>THAT'S< why we created the SRD. So we can tell people: The SRD is the
only Open Game Content WotC distributes. If what you want to use isn't in
the SRD, you should consult an attorney before using something else you find
in our books.
> Well, the insistance that one must consult a lawyer is a big indicator.
Sorry, I've never insisted that anyone consult a lawyer. I've insisted that
if you want to use something that hasn't been clearly identified as Open
Game Content by its owners, you should consult a lawyer before proceeding to
use that content. That has nothing to do with commercial publication - that
has everything to do with >NOT BEING SUED<. You don't have to make money
off something to get sued. Just ask Napster.
I don't think anyone needs a laywer to use the OGL, the d20STL, or the SRD.
>From where I'm sitting, the issues surrounding their use are clear as day.
Your milage may vary, and any other advice I might provide to you about how
to use those licenses and/or other content from other sources might land me
in litigation - something I'm totally uninterested in participating in.
I want a berth in the safe harbor too.
> Also, the remark that
> scanning in and OCR'ing a product is "effectively cost-less"
Sorry, you've misquoted me. I said "the cost to >RE-TYPE< or scan and OCR a
non-digital product is >SO LOW AS TO BE A NON-ISSUE<." An individual could
re-type a 32 page standard sized d20 release in just over four hours. I
know, because I did it. Thus, it's a non-issue. Mild inconvenience is not
a barrier to entry or to use.
> Hehe, it's kinda interesting to see how the legalese nicely meshes to
> make it seem like on the surface this is a legitimate free game thing,
> based on the GNU principles, yet as you dig down, it really appears to
> be little different than the standard commercial approach.
Hehe, yeah, except for the whole royalty free, approval free, nonexclusive,
worldwide copyright license bit, huh?
Oh, and on the part of WotC, the whole 100% digital, common format, easily
reformatted contents of the System Reference Document, including every
class, race, skill, feat, item of equipment, spell, magic item and monster,
plus the combat system, the magic system, and the magic item creation system
derived directly from the world's best selling tabletop RPG. But hey, who's
counting?
> Do you envision that this living document will include PI material or
> will it be strictly non-PI?
If it grows as I intend it, it will never have PI. It will be easy for
people to use, because they'll only have to know one thing: If the content
is in the SRD, then the content is Open Game Content.
Star Wars, of course, is lurking out there to screw me up, and it's an issue
I'm avoiding even thinking about at the moment.
> Are the D&D products scheduled to be released under this?
For the foreseeable future, the process will work like this:
WotC will publish a book.
WotC will send me the text contents of that book.
As I have time, I will redact the non-game rule, non-game content, leaving
behind "System Reference" material just like the current contents of the
SRD.
I will send that material to WotC R&D. As WotC R&D has time, they will
review my work to be sure that I haven't introduced any errors, or ommitted
material that should be included. They'll also flag anything they think
might be Product Identity that the company might want to excise.
R&D will send the material to the business managers, who will review it to
ensure that it meets the standards for quality and usability that the
business managers want to enforce for the SRD.
The business managers will notify Legal that they have approved, and notify
me that the material is ready for release. They will probably also ask me
to wait to formally release the content until it can be prepared and
presented on the WotC web site first.
Ryan
_______________________________________________
Ogf-l mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
