Russ Taylor wrote:
>
> On 9/8/00 12:12 PM, Lizard ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote
>
> >Bzzzt! Wrong answer, and thank you for playing!
>
> Really now? Tell me, Lizzie, how is the first statement accurate, yet
> the second inaccurate? I realize that actually analyzing the issue
> (which I did in the portion you snipped) takes some effort, but it's much
> more intellectual than typoing raspberries.
>
> Looking forward to your analysis!
>
It is quite simple.
There is no moral or ethical obligation to pass on work derived from
material in the public domain -- since anyone can access the same source
material freely.
There is, however, an argument that if person 'a' is willing to allow
you to use his *private* *property* for your purposes, you, in turn,
have an obligation to show someone else the same consideration. It's a
basic 'trickle down hospitality' system of ethics -- that if someone is
kind to you, you should be kind to someone else in turn. You pay back
your benefactor by being the benefactor to someone else.
No one was being kind to TSR, WOTC, or Disney when they mined work in
the public domain for their creations -- therefore, they have no
obligation to pass along that generosity. WOTC, however, has voluntarily
allowed people to use their property to create derivative works -- and
the creators of those works, in turn, ought to allow their creations to
be so used.
But there's nothing in the current WOTC to require this, thus permitting
the benefit chain to cease at a depth of 1. The OGL, OTOH, compels
ethical behavior. (We can all argue that ethical behavior should not be
compelled, but the past couple of millennia of human history shows that
a kind word and a 2x4 gets you more than a kind word.)
In other words, since WOTC did not actually 'receive' any freedoms from
the non-owners of public domain works, they, in turn, do not have any
freedom to 'pass on'. Since the creators of material derived from
copyrighted and trademarks works ARE receiving freedom, they, in turn,
are morally obliged to pass it on.
Fairly simple, really. Unless you go with the anti-propertarian concept
that there is no such thing as intellectual property, since every
creator is a product of his culture, and culture belongs to The Masses.
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
