On Fri, 18 Jan 2002 00:42:45 -0500, Richard Stewart wrote: >If you designate...OR if you use someone else's OGC as provided >under the OGL then it is OGC. If it isn't then it isn't.
The issue we're talking about is about deriving something new from OGC, not reusing OGC as-is. The question boils down to this: If I create a monster with a full description of its appearance and make it open content, and you publish a module with a picture of that monster based on my description, your picture has to be open content, because it is derivative. For example, if someone creates an open version of the SRD Aboleth with a description and picture based on public domain sources that predate its creation in the 2nd Edition Monstrous Compendium, one of two things needs to be done: 1) The picture of the monster needs to be designated as open content. 2) Language needs to be included in the licensing section indicating that while the picture is closed content, the visual representation of the monster represented by the picture is open content. I can't even imagine the best way to word option 2 to pass legal muster, but it's an issue that has to be resolved before any Open Creature Project goes forward. (Personally, after doing a few hours' research on the first monster in the SRD -- the aforementioned aboleth -- I don't think people recognize the amount of time a project like this will take.) _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
