> From: Doug Meerschaert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> #1: Ryan, can we take your position as WotC's position No. I am no longer a representative of WotC in the sense that my opinion has any legal weight. On the other hand, WotC doesn't really have a "position" on most of these matters because WotC, as an organization, doesn't pay it any attention. If and when they wanted to have an opinion, they'd likely ask me for mine. > #2: Regardless of the question to the above... given your stated > position as , is it EVER possible to distribute a program, with or > without the source code? Possible examples: Sure. I've already said so explicitly. There is absolutely nothing in the OGL that relates to software at all. The OGL is software neutral. The problem isn't software, the problem is issues related to distribution and additional licensing restrictions. And those problems aren't WotC problems - they're 3rd party problems. WotC doesn't care what you do, as long as you comply with the OGL. The 3rd parties care because they don't really want to give you free software - they want to use Open Game Content to create a non-free software product that they can sell you along with a license that restricts your rights to copy, modify and distribute that software. They have a problem because they can't figure out how to both comply with the OGL, and add those additional restrictions. You could write a NeverWinter Nights clone right now based on the SRD and the OGL, and release it to the world, and nothing WotC could do could stop you. The problem is that the whole work would be OGC (in my opinion). If that doesn't bother you, you don't have a problem. On the other hand, if you don't want your whole work to be freely copyable, modifable, and distributable by every person who receives a copy, then you have a problem. Most people who have discussed software projects here and other places related to the OGL chose to have this problem. It is a choice that the paper-based publishers don't have to face because they can easily implement the clauses which define clearly identifying Open Game Content, whereas the software guys have not shown an interest in doing so in their unique medium. > Bonus Question: I don't think this has been answered before, > but is an > Appendix of all the OGC in a work, and no other designation > of the OGC > wherever else it shows in the work, a suitable "clear > identification" of > OGC for the OGL? Nope. Any place OGC appears in a work, it must be clearly identified to the recipient. If OGC exists in the work, and nothing tells me where it is or what it is, it isn't Clearly Identified. Ryan _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
