Oh no, how could I have forgotten about the whole "force content open" issue. Why did
I even respond to this.
Clark
>>> Kal Lin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 08/01 9:34 PM >>>
On Tue, 1 Aug 2000, John W. Mangrum wrote:
> On this I agree. On the other hand, I'm not the one equating a creator
> seeking to protect his or her intellectual property with a, and I quote,
> "hostage taker." Having remembered who I'm talking to, however, I'll
> drop the subject.
1) I said modified open content belongs to the community even
if someone declares it closed.
2) I said the existing trademark laws are preferable to
additional protection for trademark owners under the OGL.
If you want to disparage me for holding these opinions
then fine. I still stand by them.
If you think I said something else then either I
miscommunicated or you misunderstood. That can easily
happen since I am working from the basis that open gaming
should favor openness and freedom to participate. While
others seem to be working from the basis that open gaming
should help them sell units and prevent others from
participating with compatible products.
--Kal
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
