Re: [Open_Gaming] Final Text of Approved Open Gaming License

[Kal Lin]

On Sat, 16 Sep 2000, Ryan S. Dancey wrote:

>What we need to do is to have a process to discuss if a license meets the
>definition of an Open Game (www.opengamingfoundation.org/foundation.html)

While we do not have a process to do decide yet...

>Unfortunately, the FUDGE License does not meet the definition of an Open

...we should not be declaring FUDGE ineligble.  We should install a 
process and then work with the FUDGE people.  

>Clearly, anything under the GPL should be eligible.  And while I've been
>arguing the technicalities of the FDL on r.g.r.moderated, I'd be at peace if
>FDL licensed materials were included.  I'd also count Dominion Games'

Would the foundation fully support a completely original document
released under the GFDL that gives a new expression to the 3rd 
Edition Dungeon & Dragons game mechanics?  What about the same 
document under an OGL-like license without the PI clause?


-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org