----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 2:42 PM Subject: Re: [Ogf-l] OGC Designation (Rant)
> I think that's really > what some folks want from those who are essentially riding on WotCs > coat-tails. Give us the same rights that WotC (or any other OGC contributor) > gave you. Isn't that precisely what OGL publishers do? WotC gave them (er, us) the right to use material they've designated as OGC. Third-party d20 publishers do exactly the same thing. Of course, WotC hasn't designated everything they possibly could (far from it) as OGC. Neither do third-part d20 publishers. In any case, I don't think many publishers consider "openness" or the "idea of open gaming" to be "the point" of the OGL/d20STL. From my perspective, "the point" is that we get to publish RPG products that are compatible with the bestselling RPG, as long as we follow the terms of the licenses. Openness for its own sake, or as some kind of ideology, has zero value to me as an employee of a game company -- and I suspect the same is true for the decision-makers at WotC. Of course, I have self-interested reasons for making our OGC as easy to use as possible. For starters, I want to be able to use other publisher's OGC. If every publisher's OGC is impossible to use in a practical sense, the license loses some of its value (not a whole lot, probably, but some). Greg FFG _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
