> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Todd Landrum > Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 10:00 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [Ogf-l] RE: Derivative Works > > >> My opinion is that if your software uses the "rules" from the SRD to > >> process user input and generate otuput, your work is derivative of the > >> SRD. > > It does in a limited number of places. I'll have to try to find some remedy > for that as well. Looks like I'll be up late tonight studying the OGL and > banging my head on the wall.
My condolences. But as Ryan has pointed out, there are a lot of night owls here. So if you're looking for feedback, don't hesitate to post questions during your late night. I'll bet you'll get lots of opinions -- maybe even a valid one, now and then. Here's one opinion (possibly invalid): I think Ryan may be being too generous with you. His statement of 'if your software uses the "rules" from the SRD to process user input and generate otuput' sounds pretty much like the definition of "Interactive Game" from the d20 System Guide. And while he's right that that would certainly be derivative (AND forbidden if you wanted to use the d20 STL), I'm not at all convinced that would be the ONLY way your software could be derivative. If you wrote a simple form which contained a label and a blank space for every field on the D&D character sheet that's included in the PHB, that form would seem to me like a derivative work, even if it never once processed user input and generated output from that. I just don't see how a point by point listing of the stats, terms, and values that make up a d20 character can be anything but derivative of the SRD. Martin L. Shoemaker Martin L. Shoemaker Consulting, Software Design and UML Training [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.MartinLShoemaker.com http://www.UMLBootCamp.com _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
