I think it's clear to me that the "clearly identify" requirement is to know what can be redistributed. If the goal of the license was to allow publishers to easily track which parts of a work were based on their OGC and which weren't, then the license would allow (or _require_) subsquent users to footnote their works to show which parts of the derivative work come from which OGL sources.
Contrariwise, i argue that if the point of the "clearly identify" requirement were to make redistribution easy, there'd be a requirement to provide a "transparent" or "editable" copy of the redistributable parts.
-- woodelf <*> [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://webpages.charter.net/woodelph/
The avalanche has already begun. It is too late for the pebbles to vote. -- Kosh _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
