On Sun, 20 Jan 2002, Clark Peterson wrote: > Why doesnt it seem right? What you agreed to is the > OGL which specifically states that can be done.
Because you're agreeing to a contract you didn't read, have no say in the writing of, and can't withdraw from if you don't like that terms. That just seems wrong, legally. > If you dont want something to be republished that is > open content in a product that uses a later license > then you better not publish. I hate to break it to you > but there is nothing preventing someone from doing > that. There should be, in my opinion. If you release something under version X of the OGL, that's how you released your work. You didn't release it under version Y, so no one should have any right to rerelease it under a different version. I'm not saying they can't, since that's apparently what the license says, I'm just saying that that's wrong to me. > Just out of curiosity, what could be your possible > objection? I have no idea, probably nothing, and I doubt that clause would stop me if anyone accepted anything I wrote. I was looking for clarification because a literal reading of that license seemed wrong, legally. Granted all I know about contract law could fit in this email, but I didn't think you could bind people to unseen terms with no chance of withdrawal. -Damian _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
