I completely misunderstood PI, then.  I've never really concerned myself with
it (obviously a good thing, apparently), since everything I've published or had
published was all OGC or someone else's property (contract work).

-Mike

--- Clark Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Now here, as I understand it, is the crux of Alec's
> > argument. If the
> > material is non-OGC, the OGL does not apply to it.
> > Therefore, the
> > designation of PI has no meaning within non-OGC,
> > only within OGC. 
> 
> He and I have always agreed on this. In fact, I
> proposed it long ago.
> 
> > And
> > therefore, PI is NOT non-OGC; 
> 
> Corrrect. PI is a subset of OGC. If the content isnt
> mixed with OGC, there is no need to designate it as
> PI.
> 
> Clark
> 
> 
> 
> =====
> http://www.necromancergames.com
> "3rd Edition Rules, 1st Edition Feel"
> _______________________________________________
> Ogf-l mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l


__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
Ogf-l mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l

Reply via email to