From: Clark Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

> Nope.  A semantic slip, but an important one.  The
> licence specifically
> states that PI is >not< OGC.

Actually, PI is stuff that would be OGC because it
falls within a section designated as OGC, but because
you designate it as PI it is not OGC. You can also
designate stuff that is not in OGC as PI.
Much better!

So as I said in my last post, perhaps "subset" is not
the best way to put it. My bad.
Yes. Exactly. My chief concern is the "no sub-license" clause of the OGL that states that OGC cannot have restrictions placed on it by subsidiary licences. This is *not* the case with PI - you can have sub-licenses on it to your heart's content.

Faust

_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail

_______________________________________________
Ogf-l mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l

Reply via email to