On Sun, 22 Apr 2001, Brad Thompson wrote: > It isn't closed, it's in violation. You can't use it because then you too > would be in violation as soon as the original copyright holder got around to > notifying the bogus work's creator of the breach. It isn't legal to take > their work and 'do it right for them' because that isn't one of the rights > they granted to you under the OGL. Consider if people closed off public domain names. There is no original copyright holder. Are you suggesting just never citing their work even if they build on yours, mine and everyone else's open content? _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
- Re: [Ogf-l] d20 and Naked Licenses Greg Gliedman
- RE: [Ogf-l] d20 and Naked Licenses Faustus von Goethe
- RE: [Ogf-l] d20 and Naked Licenses Brad Thompson
- RE: [Ogf-l] d20 and Naked Licenses Brad Thompson
- RE: [Ogf-l] d20 and Naked Licenses Brad Thompson
- Re: [Ogf-l] d20 and Naked Licenses Greg Gliedman
- RE: [Ogf-l] d20 and Naked Licenses Kal Lin
- RE: [Ogf-l] d20 and Naked Licenses Brad Thompson
- RE: [Ogf-l] d20 and Naked Licenses Clark Peterson
- RE: [Ogf-l] d20 and Naked Licenses Kal Lin
- RE: [Ogf-l] d20 and Naked Licenses Kal Lin
- RE: [Ogf-l] d20 and Naked Licenses Brad Thompson
- RE: [Ogf-l] d20 and Naked Licenses Brad Thompson
- RE: [Ogf-l] d20 and Naked Licenses Alec A. Burkhardt
- RE: [Ogf-l] d20 and Naked Licenses Kal Lin
- RE: [Ogf-l] d20 and Naked Licenses Kal Lin
- RE: [Ogf-l] d20 and Naked Licenses Rogers Cadenhead
- RE: [Ogf-l] d20 and Naked Licenses Brad Thompson
- RE: [Ogf-l] d20 and Naked Licenses Alec A. Burkhardt
- RE: [Ogf-l] d20 and Naked Licenses Brad Thompson
