I
think the audience it would be of interest to is very small, compared to the
amount of work it would require to maintain. It places burdens on publishers to
assist future derivations - a situation that nets them very little (if any)
return. In addition, if just one author in the chain opts out of this concept,
you're back to doing your own legwork through section 15.
Although it would be a nice situation, I just don't see it coming about
without the teeth of the license behind it, and while the license can be
changed, all authors have the option of using any license with OGC, so in effect
the license is immutable unless the entire community wants to embrace it. I just
don't see it happening.
-Brad
-----Original Message-----In a message dated 9/28/02 1:03:54 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, September 28, 2002 8:17 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Ogf-l] OGL Product Registry Database
<<That's why the section 15 of the OGL exists, that's how *I* track down the original sources. All you need is a little leg work.
>>
Sometimes it could be _a_lot_ of leg work and may require you to own (or have access to) every item on the Section 15 list to track down a specific original source.
A number of people on the list have expressed a desire to provide a direct source for each spell, monster, item, etc in their OGC section, while still being OGL-compliant.
Clearly you have no such desire or need to provide "in line" credits and so the suggestion of a product registry database is not of interest to you.
