Clark Peterson wrote:
> Thats why the OGL is
> valuable. We get the keys to the car as long as we
> promise to drive safe. No OGL, no car keys.
I think that's a great illustration of what the OGL does. It seems
to me that the real strength of OGC and the OGL is not its legal impact,
but the sort of communication it activates in the industry (if you
will). Publishing OGC is a statement of intent. It's not just a promise
to publish things that won't get you sued, it's an agreement to respect
the developments of others surrounding your products, without the cost
of supporting them. It seems to me that it will lessen the grudges which
come from some inevitable litigation. I mean, if you're publishing OGC
you're demonstrating a desire (true or not) to further the hobby, the
d20 design, and work with your fellow designers. Companies somehow
slighted in the process will probably be more forgiving because you are
trying to follow the OGL.
The network founded between products is also much stronger because
of OGC. I might write an adventure based on something I read somewhere,
but I won't be able to reference it any detail legally without the OGL.
OGC is like publishing a jigsaw piece or a building block connector; it
invites designers to add on, invent, and play nice with everyone. Even
when the same development is possible under normal trademark law, there
is no invitation. Instead, litigation drives designers to go and play by
themselves.
Even if the legal elements of the OGL grow so heavy that it falls
over in the future, the statement made within the industry is clear.
It's a friendly, positive statement. Something good will come of it,
even if the experiment fails.
Or so I think.
word,
will
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
