> Because it is based on the GPL, which is 100% viral (you cannot release a
> program which is partly proprietary and partly GPL'd), it cannot be used
> effectively in our industry. The value of the "game" is often the least
> valuable portion of a gaming product - the value of the "IP" is often the
> most valuable portion. Without providing for this separation, the concept
> of Open Gaming would never work.
Yes, I hate to chime in with a me-too, but in the four weeks or so I've been
lurking on this list, this is the most important post I've seen in terms of
justifying the existence of the OGL.
There is no question in my mind that the reason the GFDL is not a good model
to use is because there is no way to retain the creative control over (or
profit from) your creative work and still incorporate "Open Source" (ie.,
community) intellectual property into it.
Won't it be great when years of community collaboration over what
constitutes the core features and trade-offs of role-play gaming mechanics
allow us all to benefit from a polished, modular, flexible, powerful, and
balanced set of open game rules? Not to mention some degree of
interoperability?
-dave
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
