At 10:45 PM 25/06/00 -0400, Kal Lin wrote:
>On Thu, 22 Jun 2000, Andrew Hackard wrote:
> > At 01:44 AM 22/06/00 -0400, Kal Lin wrote:
> > >If material does become pushed into openness against people's
> > >wishes, I don't see it as being bad for the community.
> >
> > Nice to see such respect for intellectual property, Kal. Keep your
> > hands off the stuff I write, thanks all the same.
>
>Then please do not use any open content if you want every
>thing you write to be closed.
But by your own statement, even if I declare something closed, and
somebody else decides to overrule my choice and publish my works under
the OGL, that's good for the community.
And I reply, if I close my content, it's because I want it closed. Keep
your grubby mitts OFF it, thank you VERY much. The "good of the
community" doesn't supercede my rights to do with my own creations as I
damn well please.
>Anyone who would actually takes the time, effort and risk to
>push something open that they believe is truly derived from
>open content is showing respect for the original open content.
That's such a charming little piece of bullshit, Kal. It's the
responsibility of the original creator of the open content to ensure it
stays open, not some vigilante gamer who thinks he has the right to
pull other people's work under the OGL.
>Anyone who tells people to keep their hands off stuff they
>derived from open content is the one not showing respect.
Was I talking about stuff derived from open content? Your initial
comment sure wasn't that specific -- it just says "material", with no
hint of its origin. *That's* why I got hot -- because you seemed to be
saying that it was OK to take original material, closed by the wishes
of the creator, and "force" it open. If you were just talking about
open-derived stuff, then you should have made your statement clearer.
--
"People are stupider than anybody." | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Tom Lehrer | AIM: Talthybias
| ICQ: 19083015
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
