Steve Creech wrote:
> Well, a polite email goes a heck of a lot farther in getting
> permission to use material than a demand to clean up their ogc so you
> don't have to go to the trouble to comprise a short inquiry email.
Steve, the point is that sometimes people accidentally close up previously open content. They have no power to grant you permission to use that content because they had no right to close up previously open content in the first place.
In these instances, asking for a new OGC declaration is just that -- it is not asking for permissions or trying to railroad people into opening up stuff that they don't want open. At least it's not for me. It's just asking for clarity and proper handling of the OGL. If people want to close down almost everything that's not 100% derived from the SRD, then cool. You'll get no complaint from me.
An email of inquiry is insufficient sometimes. What you really need is an unambiguous OGC declaration to work with, however you can manage to obtain it.
I really don't see that asking for clarification is "publisher bashing". I really don't. It's a friendly way to guarantee that you don't step on other people's rights, and further it's protection for you to guarantee that you don't do that and get dragged off to court.
Lee
