> > >I would disagree with that, but that is strictly my professional and personal >opinion and not a legal based opinion. Again, why not do what's right rather than >take advantage of a loophole in order to run roughshod over something that was >previously unattainable? It all boils down to professional courtesy and not >necessarily whether it's legal or not. Again, just my personal feelings and stance >and not a indicator of who's right or wrong in this discussion. :-) > > I think everyone agrees with you. The problem though, is that just taking the Spycraft book on its own merits, and not realizing that WotC never intended the rules to be open. I would say that the rules had been clearly open, no grey.
Since I do know that WotC hadn't intended to make them open through the book, I just assume that they are closed since Spycraft didn't have the authority to open them. The only reason that I know that WotC didn't intend to open them is because I happen to be on this list. I bet there is a fan site out there that has the rules posted as open content from the Spycraft book, because according to the book, they are open content now, and they don't realize that WotC never intended them to be open. Just my 2 cents. Have Fun, Darren _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
