From: kevin kenan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>The core question is: can WotC recind the OGL preventing us from releasing
>new OGL'ed games?
Ryan has always stated that the OGL would not be able to be recinded. I see
that the text forbidding the reproduction of the OGL without the permission
of WotC has been removed from the text of the license. I think there is
confusion as to whether the statement of permission to distribute the OGL is
actually a part of the license or not. If it a part of the text of the
license, then there is no way WotC can recind it according to the terms set
down in the OGL. They could take that text out of a future version of the
license per section 9, we could use any previously authorized version of the
license. If the text is not part of the OGL, then WotC can disallow people
from reproducing and distributing the license, thereby effectively putting
an end to all open game content released under the OGL. To me it would make
more sense to put this text under section 10 of the license if it is fact a
part of the OGL. In either case, the OGL would benefit from being more
clearly identified as opposed to the rest of the text on the web page with
it. My understanding of this issue is that the permission statement is not
a part of the OGL, but WotC's announcement that the license has been
authorized and approved for use by the Open Gaming Community.
Another interpretation of the OGL could be that WotC's permission is not
necessary because the license requires you to provide a copy of the license
with every copy of OGC you distribute. Because the license requires that
you distribute it, WotC cannot prevent you from doing so. That would be a
breach of the license on their end and the person or persons they attempted
to prohibit would have the right to sue them. Just because WotC owns the
license does not mean that they don't have to obide by it. While I am not a
lawyer, this seems logically correct to me and it seems to mesh with the
points Ryan has made since the release of OGL v1.0.
>If so, then there is a risk that at some future date the foundation will
>need to create a new license. This would be awkward at best.
I agree completely. If I believed that his was the case, I'd be calling for
the OGF to create a new license on its own and ignore the OGL.
>Ideally, since there is no financial gain to owning the copyright in the
>license itself, WotC will assign ownership of the license to the foundation
>once the foundation is incorporated.
The foundation would certainly benefit from such an action but it is not
very realistic to expect WotC to do so, especially with the OGF still in
it's infancy. I could see such an act being much more likely in the future,
after the foundation has been officially organized and proven itself. Until
such a time, I think that WotC's ownership of the license is more beneficial
and adds a certain level of credibility to it when viewed by people outside
the Open Gaming Community.
Chris
www.IDrankWhat.org
www.coincidental.net
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
