On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 08:59:57 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > 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. > > This seems to defy the definition of OGC in the license. It > seems that everything in the work that isn't PI is OGC.
If everything in a work that isn't PI is OGC, then there isn't that third category of content (content that is neither OGC nor PI, but is still closed nonetheless) that many users of the license argue exists. Spike Y Jones _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
