Yup, that about sums the whole argument up. Whether for software of straight up publishing under the licenses. I am not a lawyer, I know that Andrew (Tir Gwaith) and Chris (Barak) are not lawyers, so you can dismiss our words if you like, but we _have_ gone through the meat grinder over definitions and interpretations.
Unless you want to go to court over it, Wizard's interpretation is all that matters, not a single person's opinion matters. If you have the money and you're willing to fight it, by all means, go ahead. A great many people would be interested in that outcome I'm sure. W. Robert Reed III Mynex - #1 Evil Monkey - Code Monkey Publishing Co-Founder - El Mono Calvo Malvado > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of Tir Gwaith > Sent: Saturday, August 02, 2003 2:19 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [Ogf-l] Possible Formation of Project > > > > >Because you can't read the OGC out of the binaries... not without > specialized > > >technical knowledge. > > > > So? Where does the OGL say the OGC has to be human > readable. It only > > says it has to be clearly indicated. > > From a PCGen dicussions with Wizards of the Coast, Wizards (and their > lawyers) interpret it that way. We (PCGen team) didn't feel > the need to contest that..... You can interpret any license > in almost any light. What matters is what a judge will > interpret it, or how another lawyer will interpret with the > conviction to make you pay money to defend your position.. > > Andrew McDougall > a.k.a. Tir Gwaith > PCGen Data Silverback and BoD > > > _______________________________________________ > Ogf-l mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l > _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
