On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 05:15:37 -0600 "Mark Clover" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > There is nothing in the license that restricts someone from > declaring something as PI even when it does not fall within a > section declared as OGC.
One interpretation of the license (the one favoured by Ryan Dancey, among others) is that the license only applies to the Open Content within a book, not that which isn't a part of the Open Content. If you accept this interpretation, then a publisher can make any declarations he wants regarding the Closed Content and they would be entirely irrelevant as far as the OGL is concerned; outside of the Open Content normal copyright, trademark, and fair use rules apply. Only when the PI meanders into the OGC areas would the power of the OGL be required (and even able) to protect those terms. Or put another way, if you print a book that doesn't use the OGL at all, then declaring any part of it Product Identity is silly; the OGL-derived concept of Product Identity doesn't have any meaning outside of the OGL. Spike Y Jones _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
