On 15 Jun 2003 DarkTouch scribbled a note about Re: [Ogf-l] Employee mistake scenario:
> In a community, if you're going to take a stance like this then what > is good for the goose is good for the gander. If you're going to hold > Wizards to such strict standards then you better be ready to hold > Necromancer, Feiry Dragon, Malhavok Press, Green Ronin, Mongoose, AEG, > Natural 20 Press, Mystic Eye Games, Bastion Press, and the whole host > of others to the same stringent standards. > Yes. For the OGL to work, all who participate in it must be held to the same standard. If any of those companies released some of *their* PI as OGC, they would be expected to just have to deal with the consequences of it. The same applies for WOTC as well, which is what this whole discussion is about. If one of the companies listed released something that they have no authority to release (like the trademarks or PI of another company, then there is breach and the cure period is in effect. But, if the company accidently releases something that it owns, that is entirely different. If they own it, then they DO have the authority to release it. Stated intentions have no impact on whether or not the company does release something. Only the fact that they released it, and they had the authority (as a company) to do so. > Then give them the time to do the cost analysis to see if the money > they save in rpg development by using the OGL is worth the money > they'll loose should they a peice of their IP accidentally slip into a > section of OGC Hehe! They should have done this prior to getting into using the OGL and OGC as part of their business model. If they haven't, then that is their fault and potential problems. TANSTAAFL Rasyr (Tim Dugger) System Editor Iron Crown Enterprises E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
