From: "Aaron & Lori Smalley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2000 4:07 PM
Subject: Re: [Open_Gaming] Final Text of Approved Open Gaming License
>
> "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?
In addition to a few other things, unlimited freedom to copy, modify and
distribute Open Game Content.
> 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".
The reasons the restrictions are in the license are not important when
determining if the license is Open or not. The fact that Stephen has not
yet refused to grant a commercial license doese not mean that he would not
at some point. As long as that clause remains in the FUDGE License, the
FUDGE License will not be considered an Open Game License by the Foundation.
Ryan
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
