John, please refer to the "downstream liability" example that I have
reposted at the end of this message. Thanks.
[John Said]
>Tell me how I have incurred "downstream liability" by labeling the proper
>name "Kyrielee" from "The Tide of Years" as Product Identity.
No John. Not you. If you LABEL something PI, you are Party A in the
example. You are a PRODUCER. You do not incur downstream liability.
If Brad ACCEPTS a contribution with PI in it, he is NOT the original
copyright holder. He is accepting something FROM a contributor, and is
being TRUSTED to get the PI issues right. He is Party B.
The same will happen to ANY USER who takes a document with ANY PI in it, and
tries to sort out what is "OPEN" and what is PI. They are Party B.
Party B is the one at risk. If they make a mistake in interpreting the PI,
anybody who USES the result inadvertantly violates PARTY A's IP.
IMO, this is not a problem that will significantly affect most producers
very much. Why? Because producers will, in most cases, not generate
significant "generations" of products. They will always be publishing "new"
material that they produced. They will never be downstream.
But for FANS, they ALWAYS re-use. It is the nature of the calling. If FANS
and PRODUCERS use the same license, it is only a matter of time before the
FANS start to think they can become PRODUCERS by "PUBLISHING" their netbook
that contains 19 "generations" of IP.
This is why I am maintaining that the OGL/D20 does not support the needs of
the FAN community. There are too many potential entanglements.
Faust
DOWNSTREAM LIABILITY EXAMPLE:
TO REFRESH EVERYONE'S MEMORY, HERE IS THE "DOWNSTREAM LIABILITY" EXAMPLE
AGAIN. PLEASE DO NOT POST ON THIS ISSUE WITHOUT REFERRING TO IT. THIS IS A
VERY REAL EXAMPLE. I HAVE HAD IT EXPLAINED TO ME BY MORE THAN ONE EXTREMELY
QUALIFIED IP EXPERT.
1. Party A writes an OGL document with a large part of it
PI (copyright work).
2. Party B mistakenly publishes the entire work as "open".
3. Party C sees Party B's work, and writes and PUBLISHES
a game based on the "mistakenly" open content.
4. Party A informs party C they cannot use the content,
but too late - Party C has already spent $50,000 printing
up their work. Way too late, because now they CAN'T publish
and the $50 grand is wasted - GONE.
This scenario leaves Party B clearly legally liable for Party C's $50 grand
- even though all they did was pass on work they believed to be open. It
might have been an honest mistake, or a late night printing blunder, but
they are still liable, because it was THEIR mistake.
Moreover, they have almost NO CHOICE but to try to recoup that loss from
Party B. They have nowhere else to go.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
_______________________________________________
Ogf-l mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
