Q: I want to distribute computer software using the OGL. Is that possible?
A: Yes, it's certainly possible. The most significant thing that will impact your effort is that you have to give all the recipients the right to extract and use any Open Game Content you've included in your application, and you have to clearly identify what part of the software is Open Game Content.
There are two obvious ways of doing so. The first is to distribute the source code that contains Open Game Content in a human-readable format. The second is to design your application so that all the Open Game Content sits in human-readable data files that are read and processed by your application at runtime.
The Open Gaming License has not evolved a good strategy for handling the distribution of computer game software or applications designed to combine proprietary game software with Open Game Content. At this time, if you choose not to distribute the source of your application using a license that meets the Open Source Definition, you are probably not going to be able to use the Open Game License either.
You should be especially aware of the potential of rendering your entire program a derivative work of Open Game Content, which might require you to release the whole source for your program under the terms of the OGL. If you are using materials that you don't have the authority to contribute as Open Game Content (like third-party libraries), you may not be able to distribute your work at all. You should consult your legal counsel before proceeding if you have any concerns about your ability to comply with the OGL
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
That's a ridiculous position for them to hold. If you said "all the compiled binaries included in this distribution are 100% OGC" how would that be _anything_ other than clearly indicated. That's like saying that if I have a program that generates OGC character sheet output and I distribute the character sheets as OGC that I also have to distribute copies of the software along with them. That's ridiculous. You should have to mark what you _distribute_ as OGC, not what you are not distributing.
If you tried to mark part of the binaries as OGC, then I could see where they weren't clearly indicated. But if you declare the whole thing as OGC so it's unambiguous that the entire binary can be distributed, and so what can be redistributed is 100% clear, then I think they have no enforceable claim.
Lee
