You gotta be kidding me. Once something is published under the OGL, the terms of the license only apply if the employee or employees who prepared the material had authorization to release the material, something that's not evident at all in any OGL-licensed work?Nope.
What Ryan is saying is that, worst come to worst, if a company can prove that its employee / contractor did not have permission to release text as Open Gaming Content, then that company can go to court and get injunctions to have use of said content dropped.
The reason that this isn't a problem is the company's liability--somewhere between their coprorate person and their employee lies the fault for this action, and the small guys who have to destroy stock or re-design products would probably file counter-claims against WotC, shifting the majority of their costs from this mistake to the employee and the company.
For a small mistake like what we're talking about, Wizards will probably just press for "fix it in the next print run" and "publicly admit the mistake so no one copies you." For large portions of text ("hey, what's this Mind Flayer doing in the 3.5 SRD?"), this will probably be more difficult--and if the company attempted to do it maliciously ("oh, er, that's not OGC. I mean it. I never authorized myself to release it...") the judge would probably toss them out and whomever they took to court to stop the use of said OGC would slap them with a lawsuit so bitter that the "victim" would wind up owning the company.
IANAL, etc, etc.
DM
_______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
