At 01:43 PM 11/8/2001 -0600, "woodelf (lists)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >there is one thing that the Knotworks OCGL does that none of the existing >ogls do: it gives the original author authority over subsequent authors' >works. not complete authority--it only allows her to grab Open Content >and mess with it. but nonetheless...[now we get to the value judgement >part]. i *really* don't like this.
Me too. Reading the license for the first time [1], I'm having trouble figuring out why anyone would want to contribute content under those terms. There are two classes of contributors for a work -- the Primary Author, who can publish anything, even content defined as "Protected Content" by others under the terms of the license; and Contributing Authors, who don't even have a clear right to publish their own contributions. I had to laugh at this provision for contributors: "You may, at any time, transfer all rights to the Primary Author, in writing, to any material, or portions thereof, You contribute." Gee ... I can contribute to your project, you can publish my derived work, I might not be able to publish my derived work, and you can declare my work "unofficial" or "official" at your own discretion. But I can transfer whatever rights I have left under this license to you at any time. KOCGL isn't an open license as presently written, and it seems to me that the protections it strives to give a "Primary Author" could be achieved much more simply with a trademark or a normal publisher/contributor relationship that doesn't claim to be open gaming. 1: http://www.ctmiller.net/knotworks/article.php?sid=16 Rogers Cadenhead E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://www.cadenhead.org _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
