Clark:
I think you got the wrong idea about what Kal was saying here. Either that
or I am reading it very differently than you are. I take it as this:
1. Green Ronin releases a fully open Freeport.
2. S&S releases "New Freeport" and the only change is a different stats
block and some new flavor text for one monster, but S&S PI's the monster
(with the same name).
3. Kal IGNORES the PI statement and uses the monster anyway, because the
monster is clearly derivative of the monster that "Freeport" opened,
therefore, the PI statement is invalid.
Kal's point is exactly what Ryan was "warning" us about in an e-mail several
days ago - the PI concept (although the license doesn't say this) cannot
really be extended to content that is clearly derivative. Under the
license, ANY content that is clearly derivative of Open Content MUST also be
open content.
In this case, I think that not only would Kal be FULLY within his rights to
do this, but he also would be well within the SPIRIT of the Open Gaming
Foundation as expressed on its website and official FAQ.
Faust
>From: Clark Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: [Ogf-l] d20 and Naked Licenses
>Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 11:34:34 -0700 (PDT)
>
>Kal-
>
>Thanks for posting those two emails. That pretty much
>explains what I am talking about.
>
>Clark
>
>=====
>http://www.necromancergames.com
>"3rd Edition Rules, 1st Edition Feel"
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
>http://auctions.yahoo.com/
>_______________________________________________
>Ogf-l mailing list
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
_________________________________________________________________
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
