At 02:16 PM 8/26/00 -0700, "kevin kenan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>That is the way I read it too. But I think this is a good thing since this
>clause keeps the OGC sections from leaking intellectual property. In my
>mind, the OGL is for Opening rules while keeping setting material closed;
>there are other licenses (GFDL for instance) if you want to Open everything.
>However, section 7 allows you to use a separate license to cover Product
>Identity. So you can release your adventure using the OGL and then provide a
>seperate license that allows others to use particular elements of your
>Product Identity.
Let me see if I understand you: A person who wants to release a leucrotta
for use with D20 should publish the product with the OGL, D20 trademark
license, and a license to be named later? I hope someone's kidding here.
If the whole goal of the OGL is to allow rules to be shared, I've got a
newsflash: Rules already can be shared! No one needs a license to adopt
"roll 4D6 and assign the top 3 rolls to your physical strength attribute"
as a rule in your game, even though it appears in D&D 3E. People who agree
to the license simply to share rules will be losing rights they had prior
to using it.
Rogers Cadenhead
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web: http://www.prefect.com
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
