Inglima Modica Davide Silvio wrote:
When I redistribute OGC Licensed contend, do I really to have toNo. However, you need to mark what is and is not Open Gaming Content, as clearly as you can. Distributing Source Code only allows this to be done by comments. However, if you want to distribute compiled binaries, you should structure the program such that there's no question which parts are and are not OGC. (i.e., "the file "usrdata.bin" is Open Gaming Content", the file "dataparser.exe" is not.)
distribute it ONLY as sourcecode?
"I, [packager], hereby certify that [jarfile], built in [date] isIt wouldn't work because you need to include the OGL in every distribution you do, as well as the OGC.
subject under the OPEN GAMING LICENSE, and has code that has
been taken from [sourcecode], which is disciplined under
Open Game License... and which is avaiable free of charge on: the
internet at [location] (and eventual real-life snail address sources
providing money or phisical medium and s.a.s.e.)"
A disclaimer such as "[jarfile] is Open Gaming Content, and may be distributed under the terms of the Open Gaming license. For the Source-Code of [Jarfile], feel free to [whatever]."
The OGL has no GPL like provisions for distributing source code seperately.
What would happen if I create a small installer, like the oneIANAL...
coming with the Mozilla and Netscape Browser... which asks me which
stuff I would like to download and from which source I would like to
compile it (or re-use in the case of a binary download)?
But it seems to be that your installer would be fine and dandy--and wouldn't even need to be GPL or OGC--but it wouldn't change any of your responsibilies if you use an installer or just ship a ready-to-run single-folder program.
3) Derivation. This is still tricky and maybe risks to be a little
raise dead on the former horse :)...
What parts that call OGL code will fall under OGL code?
What parts are to be found to be derivative?
Oh, dear me....
If I only use the OGL material in the MODEL part of my softwareSounds right to me. If I make a die roller and bundle it with an OGL'd campaign manager, the die roller doens't need to be OGC..
architecture, the other stuff does not have to be licensed under the OGL.
Someone said that flavour text or graphics are going to coem straight fromThey were wrong. Just look at all of the flavor text and graphics that are closed content. (And, really, there aren't even _descriptions_ for most of the SRD.)
OGL.
In game: Everything bearing the small "OGL" (open gaming license) mark inSounds like a good way to mark OGC to me.
the description panels or graphics while displayed in the Encyclopedia
form.
4) What would happen in an online-game paradigm?I believe some of the legal-minded folk mentioned that if you don't distribute, you don't need to worry about marking OGC.
5) What happens if the game player has a very limited platform?I don't see why--as long as they can get it all from the server, I can't think of a reason why it would need to stay on the client. Any OGC that was in the client would need to be indicated, but not what they don't have.
Let's say: I want to play with my cellphone a OGL game which is on a
server.
Does the source code used by the server have to stay all times on the same
physical medium of the player's client?
I hope I haven't bored you, and haven't started a new batch of licensingI hope you get better advice that what I can give--sounds like a complex task.
nightmares for this mailing list and WOTC layers or the like. I really
like the SRD system and I would really love to be able to use it for my
projects.
You may want to contact Wizards directly, and see if they have any objections. Or (better yet) try talking to the other folks who have done SRD software development, and see what their experiences show.
DM
_______________________________________________
Ogf-l mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
