Heh Heh! I have pondered this, and my take on it is not that the SRD is an
*extract* of the PHB, but rather that the SRD is being "reverse engineered"
from the PHB. Ergo, the PHB is BASED ON open content (once the SRD is
released), and it does not stipulate those parts that are closed and those
that are open, So.....
The PHB must be OPEN CONTENT by default. Copy away, kids.
Faust
PS: HELLO! Before anybody flames me, realize I am KIDDING!!!!!!
>From: Corey Reid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: RE: [Open_Gaming] "Open" Debate
>Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 11:03:04 -0700
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Received: from [207.115.64.39] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id
>MHotMailBB6D5EA8008AD820F3D2CF73402711D70; Wed Aug 23 11:10:55 2000
>Received: (from majordomo@localhost)by localhost.localdomain (8.9.3/8.8.7)
>id KAA10183for ogf-l-outgoing; Wed, 23 Aug 2000 10:20:38 -0700
>Received: from mail.bluezone.net ([208.181.83.196])by localhost.localdomain
>(8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA10180for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
>Wed, 23 Aug 2000 10:20:37 -0700
>Received: by mail1.bluezone.net with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)id
><QKZQ1W4G>; Wed, 23 Aug 2000 11:03:10 -0700
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Aug 23 11:15:36 2000
>X-Authentication-Warning: localhost.localdomain: majordomo set sender to
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] using -f
>Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
>Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Precedence: bulk
>
>This is an interesting debate. The question is whether or not the PHB is
>based on the D20 SRD.
>
>Is "based on" strictly a one-way concept?
>
>Realistically, Wotc is NEVER going to release the PHB as Open content, so
>this debate is probably pointless. But interesting.
>
>Can the the D20SRD be released as Open content, and the PHB, which it is
>based on, be released as closed?
>
>I WOULD question whether or not they ought to use the D20 trademark on the
>PHB.
>
> > ----------
> > From: Faustus von Goethe
> > Reply To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2000 9:10 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: [Open_Gaming] "Open" Debate
> >
> > >kevin kenan wrote:
> > > > example right now...). WotC releases d20 material and does not have
>to
> >
> > >abide
> > > > by the license. If anyone else releases d20 material, they must use
> > the
> > >OGL.
> > >
> > >What do you mean? WotC abides by the OGL the same as everyone else.
>In
> > >what situation would they not?
> >
> > Does the new Players' Handbook have a copy of the OGL in the front like
> > all
> > other D20 books will have to?
> >
> > Faust
> >
> > See the FAQ, at:
> > http://www.earth1066.com/D20FAQ.htm
> > ________________________________________________________________________
> > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
> >
> > -------------
> > For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
> >
> >
>-------------
>For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
