>1) I was involved with Dunandralis. I haven't contributed not because
>of legal wrangling but rather because there doesn't seem to be any
>direction.
If you want, we can discuss that off list. There was no direction because
those of us who were supposed to provide direction were burdened with legal
BS (among other reasons.)
>2) Even with your proposed add-on _you still need to comply with the OGL_,
>just because you aren't doing it for profit doesn't mean you can't be
>involved in legal problems. With or without your add-on.
*OF COURSE* we need to use the OGL. But what Free20 would do is provide a
consistent entity--see the "Free20" message. That "agreeing to not hold
advice-givers liable" is important.
I don't know how LEGAL it is, but it's just a draft.
>No-one on this list is saying "don't do it". We are saying that unless you
>are 100% certain of your interpetation of the OGL then you need to get
>competent legal advice. The people on this list can't risk giving legal
>advice. And none of us want to see you lose everything.
Bob, even Ryan needed legal advice on the OGL. And, even *with* lawyers,
people have messed up.
What if, somehow, we *could* give advice on d20 without always saying "I'm
not a lawyer." What if there *was* a plain english document that anyone who
can read the SRD could read, follow, and not have to worry about getting
sued? Free legal advice doesn't make any sense between one business and
another--but it makes PLENTY of sense for fans and individuals who don't
stand to profit from the OGL but still want to contribute.
DM
_______________________________________________
Ogf-l mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
