Martin, This is an oldie but a goodie in terms of discussion here. I actually enjoy it more than the endless "I want to make a program that.." discussions..
I've found that the best way to think of it is to realize that there are generations as to the growth of the game in terms of what gets released as Open content. Here's how Wizards gets away with doing what they do: 1. Player's Handbook gets released with a completely closed Ruleset. Full copyright privledges to WotC. 2. SRD gets released with the attached OGL. Derivative of #1. 3. Products: From SSS, AEG, Mongoose excetera come out. Derivative of #2 therefore they have to include the OGL. 4. Star Wars, Wheel of Time, etc come out. Derivative of #1, therefor no need to include the OGL. 5. Kenzer releases Kingdoms of Kalamar through a seperate non-lisenced deal with Wizards. Derivative of #1, no need to include the OGL. Working in your Coin Flip game: 2. You create and release an open content Coin-Flip (TM) game. 3. Products from companies A,B, and C release excellent add in for coin flip. Derivative of #2, must use the OGL. 4. You create Coin Flip in Space(TM) with the nifty new "lands on its side" mechanic without even making it open content. You can do this because #4 is actually derivative of the Hypothetical #1. Also known as the manuscript on your computer. Now companies A,B, and C have to make their products derivative of #2 until you as a company go in and make a new SRD based off of #4. Hypothetically, you could make the products of companies A,B, and C worthless since everyone will be clamoring for the "official" Coin Flip products. However, if Coin flip products suddenly start taking a dave in quality as compared to the offerings of A,B, and C.. you could suddenly find that they no longer need you and people stick to purchasing the nifty suppliments. That's really only a hypothetical as people are going to be clamoring for the D&D fixes in 3.5. The jump to 4E might be a little less smooth should they make drastic changes to the rule set and people decide that they like 3E better. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Martin Cutbill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 9:44 AM Subject: Re: [Ogf-l] Just for the fun of it... > > On Tuesday, February 11, 2003, at 07:21 AM, Martin Cutbill wrote: > > > I cannot legally create a game based in my own IP (let's call it > > > Dustbin Wars), and use the SRD for the rules mechanics and not > declare > > > the rules mechanics or anything derived from SRD mechanics as Open > > > Content. > > > > But Wizards can, and does. d20 is theirs, and they don't have to > follow > > the OGL or d20 STL license to use it. Hence, nothing in *any* > Wizards > > d20 supplement is Open Content. > > > > Sixten > > So (and not being argumentative), > > I can create a totally non-derivative ruleset (i.e totally not D20, I > dunno, something that involves tossing coins), release it under the > standard OGL, have lots of people take it up & use it, then later > improve on it and, because I derived material from Open Content THAT I > ORIGINALLY AUTHORED AND OPENED, I am not obliged to declare the > derived content as Open Content also? > > Is that it? Have I got it now? > > Martin. > <confuzzed> > _______________________________________________ > Ogf-l mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
