> Kal Lin
>
> I can see your point and I think it is not an unreasonable
> interpretation of the OGL. But I'm not convinced that survival
> of sublicenses 13-OGL doesn't apply. Maybe someone else can
> give this more thought or explain how survival of sublicenses
> will work in the event of a termination.
An outstanding idea. It is my understanding that the survival clause is
present for one purpose only: to prevent everything up the chain from
becoming invalid without the author's knowledge. It does not absolve the
author of responsibility for having created a work based on one that is in
violation. If that were the case I would simply create such a work, cite it
as my source, and then publish a second one confident that when the first
one died I would be untouchable.
In reality each sub-licensee would be required to modify their works to
accommodate the changes the original author made to cure the breach.
Ideally this will be easy to cure, but any material they derived from that
is removed from the OGL entirely they'll have to give up. They would only
have to modify the work when notified by someone and told to do so - there
is no 'automatic' breach, thanks to the survival of termination clause.
-Brad
_______________________________________________
Ogf-l mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
