From: "woodelf (lists)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> IMHO, when people who are qualified *and disinterested parties in the
> sides of the debate* tell us that the law is ambiguous, then we
> should believe them.
There are no disinterested parties giving opinions. Aside from a judge,
that is (and even that can be questionable). Any IP lawyer is going to be
paid by someone to give his opinion (or have some personal reason, hence
interest, for writing on the topic), and that opinion will be based on the
best interests of the person paying him.
> so far, the only IP lawyers we've heard from
> (albeit indirectly) are those who have a vested interest in, or at
> least incentive for, the law being interpreted in a certain way.
Congratulations. You've described attorneys.
> he's a disinterested third party.
Perhaps, but being involved in the RPG industry he's likely to have opinions
about other things that affect this opnion (everyone does, see why there's
no disnitersted parties?) He's definitely an uninformed one who's giving
you an off-the-record non-legal opinion (a lawyer's opinion is not
automatically a legal opinion). I'd infinitely rather have someone I'm
paying give me their real legal opinion, as they would then have certain
(though I'm not sure of the extent) legal obligations to defend it.
-Damian
_______________________________________________
Ogf-l mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
