> The OGL draft as it is now allows me to use someone else's work without
> compensating them in any way.
Not true; they get access to your work, just as you got access to theirs.
> I don't understand your objection.
> If the OGL
> were changed the way I suggested above, I would still want the requirement
> that a copyright notice be included in the derivative work that
> states what
> Open material was used as the source and who owns the copyright in that
> material.
Taking "open" material and being able to make "closed" work defeats the
purpose of making it "open" in the first place; we might as well make the
work public domain if we were going to do that.
The whole concept behind the open-soucre movement is that if you build upon
the community's work, you have to share your work with the community.
> As you can see from section 103(a), if you create a derivative
> work without
> permission from the copyright holder, then the law does not
> protect your new
> work. I think this is the grey area you are referring to. So if the OGL
> granted you permission to create a derivative work, then your new material
> would be protected by copyright.
I think that's it exactly. But what do I know? ;)
> "Once a game has been made public, nothing in the copyright law
> prevents others from developing another game based on similar principles."
"Once a game has been made public?" As in, "released to the"? I think this
is like the plot discussion... you can use "similar principles," but if you
copy the game rule-for-rule you can expect to hear from the first company's
lawyers.
Not to mention fans will take one look at your "new" game and say "Hey, this
is just like That Other Game! Why should I buy this when I can get TOG for
a better price, and more people play it?"
(Hey, this brings us right back to why the OGL exists in the first place...)
> We see examples of this all the time in today's RPG industry. Many game
> systems share similar rules yet aren't considered derivative
> works. I think
> that Open systems should be able to create rules similar to those which
> exist in other games to the same extent that similar rules are implemented
> in different systems today. No more, no less. If someone creates new rules
> for an Open system, then the Open system should be able to create similar
> rules to the same extent as this sort of thing is practiced in
> the industry
> today.
Hold on, let me think...
An OGL'd (or just open) game should be able to use the same non-protected
ideas that a non-open game does.
Yeah, I think that's what you said. I also think that was a "given" in this
whole concept.
DM
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
