<<
If someone then wanted to modify, and distribute materials that appear
under the Setting license but did not care about using the Setting logo
to signify that it was for the setting, he doesn't have to bother with
the setting license.
>>
<<
This seems like a nice application of the open gaming concept.
There are numerous problems though...
>>
If so, then there would be problems with the d20stl. What I posted
about is very much along the lines of how the current draft d20stl
works. "You may use the logo and show compatibility to the network of
d20/D&D products by accepting a few limitations. If you don't like it,
we're not forcing you to use it".
The fact that Maggie wants to be able to have Quality control over her
setting, as well as having limitations to the distibution of the setting
material (you can change any material but you can't distibute your
changes to the public, but you can still distribute unmodified content
which has been QC approved), already conflicts with the basis of what
the OGL is about (The Unlimited ability to copy, modify, and distribute
Open Content).
--
Korath
http://www.korath.com
"He was already dead, he died a year ago, the moment he touched her.
They're all dead, they just don't know it." --Eric Draven, The Crow
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
