> Neal Rogers
>
> Did anyone else think the following paragraph sounded,
> well, a little ominous?
<snip>
> It sounds like we're being discouraged from adding on
> to the SRD, even though the whole point of putting it
> into Open Content is to make it available to be
> modified, extended, redistributed, etc.
No, it means don't take Wizards of the Coast copyrighted material and try to
add it to the SRD. Make your own stuff and add it, but don't take theirs.
> Basically, a _lot_ of this stuff works in very
> similar ways across many roleplaying games, and I'm
> concerned that by including "certain topics" at all
> we're going to get busted for infringement.
Palladium didn't get busted. That's proof that it can be done, but it is
harder than just sitting down with a copy of the PHB and retyping the rules
you think belong in the SRD.
Also, be aware that there aren't any people who can tell you something is
100% safe. A good, experienced PI lawyer has the best chance of telling you
what is or is not infringement. Even then their advice isn't a guarantee,
it is merely what they think is right. If Wizards disagrees with them you
still might wind up in court. If you win the case, then they were right in
your specific instance, which might or might not apply the next time around.
-Brad
_______________________________________________
Ogf-l mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
