I agree with much of your interpretation. Whether something can be
PI or not is defined in 1e-OGL. Something that is not an enhancement
over prior art can be PI.
On Fri, 27 Apr 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In other words I read the definition of OGC like this:
I scope the "does not embody" differently than you in 1d-OGL:
OGC means ... [NOT (PI AND enhancement)] AND any additional ...
Apply some logical equivalence:
OGC means ... [(NOT PI) OR (NOT enhancement)] AND any additional ...
If something is declared PI and is not and enhancement over the
prior art then it is OGC and you get a licenses to use it (2-OGL).
I could be wrong but Ryan has indicated that is it how it works:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg05240.html
_______________________________________________
Ogf-l mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
