On Fri, 2 Nov 2001, Chad Stevens wrote:

> If WotC paid someone to write it, it is WotC's stuff.  I admit, however, I
> do not know if all authors were paid for their work.

You'd need to actually see the contracts to know if this is true.  Just
because someone pays someone else to write for them does not mean that the
copyright of said material automatically goes to the one who paid for the
material.  And a quick skimming of the Dragon Annual makes it obvious that
WotC does not hold the copyright on many of the articles therein.

> As far as WotC complying with the OGL, I have yet to see them include a copy
> of the license, as required by said license, with everything that they have
> produced as OGC.  If they had to comply with the thing verbatim, then why
> isn't the license at the end of every section of the SRD available for
> download at the Open Gaming Foundaiton site?  That information, as far as I
> know, is the only OGC created by Wizards.

There is certainly no need for the OGL to be included with every section
of the SRD.  The SRD is a complete work and therefore it is only necessary
for a single printing of the license to cover the entire SRD.  As a web
based publication, it is sufficient to just have a single copy of the OGL
and then indicate on each web page that the material is published under
the OGL.  The official released portions of the SRD do this quite clearly
at the top of each section on WotC's site.  The released sections of the
SRD on the OGF site do the same, altho with slightly different language.
Personally I think a direct link to the OGL from each section would be
even better.  But WotC has complied with the OGL verbatim so far regarding
the SRD.

> On the other hand, if the magazine information was taken verbatim from a
> Freeport adventure, d20 Deadlands, or whatever other non-WotC source of your
> choosing, I'd completely agree that it was done incorrectly.  However, I do
> not believe that was the case in the d20 Annual.

Even if the articles were written just for the Dragon Annual, they are not
in compliance with the OGL at least as regards the copyright notice.  If
for no other reason that section 15 was not updated to include the
copyright notice of the magazine itself.

Actually the way the license is presented in the magazine it is not even
clear that anything in the magazine is covered by the license.  The OGL
appears on page 17 just before an article authored by Ryan entitled "What
the heck is a d20 sytem?".  Nowhere do I find a statement that the
magazine has been published under the OGL.  My first assumption was that
NONE of the material in the magazine was actually OGC and that the
magazine was more of an introduction to the concept of open gaming & the
d20 system.  Especially since a significant portion of the magazine deals
with Wheel of Time material (which obviously wasn't going to be OGC).
Then I noticed one of the OGC tracker boxes as I was skimming.  These
boxes point out what is/isn't OGC in the article.  Some continue the
rather questionable (legally) practice of asserting that everything not
OGC is PI.  And some even include separate copyright statements.  At this
point it is completely unclear to me that anything from the Dragon Annual
could actually be used by someone else as OGC.  Anyone wanting to use
anything identified as OGC should probably go purchase the product
actually being advertised.  And every article that says it has OGC is
really just a long advertisement for a product.

alec
(the guy with a law degree who isn't an attorney)

_______________________________________________
Ogf-l mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l

Reply via email to