> Doug Meerschaert
>
> Not WotC... Ryan Dancy. It's a semantic argument, but one
> necessary to draw
> the line and answer the question.
This is the literal but not actual truth. I expect no ulterior motives
here, and the simple fact that Ryan has gotten WotC to pursue this
experiment speaks volumes of his commitment to the project. Regardless,
WotC will be able to influence Ryan so long as he is a WotC executive.
Which can, in turn, influence the OGF.
> "release."
My turn to say D'oh! Artifacts of a spell-checked world.
> If the OGF holds a copyright on all OGL materials, then it can sue for
> "unlawful derivation" (probably not a legal term, but proper
> meaning). If the
> author is also a member of the OGF, he can then press the suit as
> part of the
> OGF. (An officer? An employee?)
Regardless of what you call them, having hundreds of agents operating
independently to pursue an entity's legal rights is tantamount to anarchy.
The real danger here could be this: agents acting on behalf of an entity
expose that entity to the consequences of their actions. That means the OGF
would be taking on a huge legal risk by having hundreds of uncontrolled
agents acting in a potentially conflicting manner. What happens when one
agent sues another? No, while this is well-intentioned, I think it is
unworkable.
> Yes, the sticking point is the "shared copyright" between the
> author of a work
> and the OGF... is there any legal basis for this?
No. The GNU model has never been directly challenged in court. That's why
this question came up in the first place.
> > An Officer of a legal entity has many responsibilities to that
> entity, and
> > has the ability to act on behalf of the company. However,
> having a couple
> > hundred Officers pursuing their own interests while claiming to act on
> > behalf of an entity is perhaps the worst idea I've heard in a very long
> > time.
>
> Which is why, if the OGF were to do this, they would need fairly set
> guidelines for what each officer could do. If there are UCC,
> Common Law, or
> other legal restrictions on who can be called an "officer", then
> a differnent
> term could be used.
Officers are different from employees in a number of ways. Perhaps "Agent"
is the term you're looking for.
> As for a secretary... on ogf-r-l, they're discussing a database for works
> released under the OGL. Case solved.
The trouble with the registry database is that it isn't comprehensive.
Compliance with the registry is voluntary. It might also contain works
which are not OGL, since the OGF will not be approving works before they are
entered into the database.
The Secretary would have other duties as well, such as keeping track of what
all those 'agents' are up to.
-Brad
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
