Maybe I am way off but that is the point of having a unique product. YOU
thought of it and not someone else. Rules are one thing but I absolutley
disagree with the suggestion that anyone should have an obligation (even if
it is just a 'social' obligation) to release their creative property as
Open. This is a business. Give everything away and there is no money. No
money and everyone goes back to playing house rules in their basement and
proucts like the CC never exist.
At 03:12 PM 10/16/2000, you wrote:
>Sure, but I want to use the names as well. We know
>that the MM will have near 70% monsters released as
>OGC -don't you think WW could have released just ONE
>monster for other developers to use? And I mean
>including THE NAME as that is certainly the most
>important part anyway. They did not have to, I am
>just giving you feedback as a potential developer that
>it would have been helpful to me for WW to have
>released something I could use (once again, including
>the name).
>
>
>--- "J. Michael Looney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
> > On Mon, 16 Oct 2000, Greta Humber wrote:
> >
> > > Hello, any reason why Sword & Sorcery studio did
> > not
> > > update the copyright notice in section 15??? Is
> > this
> > > not required as per section 6? The monsters are
> > > really cool, too bad I cannot use any of them in
> > OGL
> > > work...
> >
> > ?????
> >
> > My CC says you can. Page 1. You can't use the
> > names or their flavor
> > text, but you can use the stats and the combat
> > section.
> >
> > --
> > http://www.spellbooksoftware.com
> > If guns are outlawed can we use swords?
> >
> >
> > -------------
> > For more information, please link to
>www.opengamingfoundation.org
>
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Messenger - Talk while you surf! It's FREE.
>http://im.yahoo.com/
>-------------
>For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
