Re: [Open_Gaming] Mixed Works?

[Githianki]

I'm splitting hairs? :) True on the legal aspects, but your sentence exactly summarizes what I was saying so I am not sure what you are objecting to.  If it isn't OGL'd it isn't, if it is it is. I never specifically addressed the existence of "non- OGC'd OGL'd material" but I did imply it might exist. Of course PI falls into that broad definition, but I assume you mean material that is neither OGC or PI, and which an author has said is covered by the terms of the OGL. I agree there is no effective difference, with the exception that material which is specifically mentioned as being under the OGL but which isn't clearly marked either way could be defined by a court settlement as being either PI or OGC in a dispute.  Material which isn't specifically released under the OGL would be safer from this.   In some sense, since the OGL does not require the clear marking of PI in the same manner as OGC (i.e. with a specific clause, even though it is mentioned in the definitions), there might be room for legal arguments that PI need not be so clearly marked.  If you consider that PI may be declared in documents outside of the material covered (as with the d20STL and G), you may find wiggle room somehow.  What good this would all serve and whether a court would see it this way is unknown. As to the whole debate on magazine content (which triggered the discussion), it is clear the OGL restrictions effectively curtail certain types of editiorial decisions in regards to non-OGL'd content, with regard to PI and Trademarks, etc. The d20 stuff does so even further.  This sucks of course. Basically, no general interest mag is going to be able to exist and cover d20 in what we might think of as a normal manner.  That is a loss to the industry not a gain. -Alex Silva