You create a new term, "Open Game Material" under an OGL 2.0 -- define
it very similar to OGC, perhaps fixing some of the "issues" people have
with that laundry list at the same time, and then restrict it's use to
version 2.0 or any future version of the license.
I certainly agree that this is possible, and even if one could change the OGL to disallow the use of OGL 1.0a with any new OGC under OGL 2.0, I think it'd be a lot more intuitive to come up with a new term to separate the two. Maybe I'm wrong.
Anyone else? Can new licensing clauses be added to OGL 2.0 to disallow any OGC released under it to be used without OGL 2.0? Or is Paragraph 9 in OGL 1.0a a grant of rights that says, "regardless of what future licenses say, if those licenses declare something as OGC then it can be used with any version of the OGL"?
The GPL makes this _much_ clearer. However, a parallel of the GPL's requirement to verify the associated GPL version for the open content could make for an ugly section 15 if that information had to be tracked as well.
Lee
