On Mon, 4 Jun 2001, Damian Smart wrote:
> At 04:42 PM 6/4/01 -0700, Alec A. Burkhardt wrote:
> >that in the appendix it is OGC? If the text is OGC in the appendix, isnt'
> >it OGC in the main text? And as such doesn't it's appearance in the main
> >text constitute a portion of the work that is OGC?
>
> Yep, that's why the Appendix says "The following is OGC wherever it appears."
And if you were the newest member of the U.S. Supreme Court I might
consider your opinion definitive. (Actually, no I wouldn't but that's a
long series of lectures which I get paid to deliver.) I've said that I
personally would not be comfortable having to argue that such a statement
makes it clear to a reasonable person what is and isn't not OGC in the
main text. No one on this list can definitively state whether the simple
statement "The following is OGC wherever it appears" meets the reasonable
person standard that a court would use to determine if the portions of a
work containing OGC are clearly identified. I've provided explanations
for why I'd be uncomfortable with it; unfortunately your response provides
absolutely no explanation of why you think a court would accept it.
alec
_______________________________________________
Ogf-l mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
