Martin --
You're right, of course. I'm not sure how the OGF will actually interact
with the licenses in the future, but I'm not disputing any of what you said. But
. . .
Martin L. Shoemaker wrote:
> << as it could
> be possible for the d20 logo to become unavailable because of
> a fault on the part of the OGF or a change of strategy at WOTC. >>
>
> Absolutely! There's a risk. And so far, half a dozen companies or so have
> accepted the risk that comes with the opportunities.
Just to cushion some of the thoughts regarding risk: changing strategies at
WotC are a real (though, currently unlikely) risk. A fault on the part of the
OGF? Not as risky, I don't think. First off, Ryan Dancey has a pretty good
relationship (understatement) with WotC, so communication is likely to remain
lively and positive. Second, even if the OGF started releasing things under the
licenses or some such:
OGL v1.0
(excerpt from item 13.)
" . . . . All sublicenses shall survive the termination of this license."
d20 STL v0.4
(except from item 6)
"Provisions which, by their nature, must remain in effect beyond the
termination of this License shall survive."
The OGL terminology has been designed specifically to keep infected branches
from affecting the whole tree. So there's still more protection against some of
the most likely risks.
word,
will
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
