"Ryan S. Dancey" wrote:
> Unfortunately, the FUDGE License does not meet the definition of an Open
> Game, because commercial distribution of FUDGE materials requires the prior
> permission of a 3rd party.
So what exactly is the "Definition" of an "Open Game" then? What
Steffan is asking is that you let him know what you plan to do with
FUDGE if you are going to use it in a "Commercial Product". It is to
keep people from using illegal trademarks and such with FUDGE (just as
WotC has retained the right to be able to force you to refrain from
doing something that is illegal with the OGL and SDR), he sees nothing
from it except keeping himself out of jail and lawsuits. So what is the
difference?
> FDL licensed materials were included. I'd also count Dominion Games'
> material (at least, the last time I reveiwed their license it was clearly an
> Open Gaming license, though I would want to take a look today and see if
> they've changed anything).
Dominion Games is anticipating releasing the DRL (Dominion Rules Licence
(yes the spelling is correct) within a week or so (as soon as they work
out a couple of the final details on the new IDR 1.0 (Illustrated
Dominion Rules, version 1.0). They had been looking at using the OGL
(and had planned on setting aside the DRL that they had been working
on), but were disappointed in the way that things were progressing, so
went back to working on their own license about 2 months ago.
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
