> Sixten Otto > > How best to present this to the user, then? The difference in > scale between > an NPC and an entire sourcebook is fairly drastic. And what of something > like the SRD? Should it be broken up into pieces as Wizards has done? > Broken up further (every spell, every item, every creature separate)? Or > recombined into one enormous document?
Partly it depends on how you intend to store it. If you are going to keep a bunch of text files on the site, then you probably don't want to go to extremes in indexing the material. If you are going to store it in a database, then you have some additional options, but the time it takes to index a document is not trivial in some cases, so you'll probably want to allow for varying levels of detail, depending on the work. > 2. Product Identity > > One of the biggest problems in reproducing OGC is the need to avoid > reproducing Product Identity. Identifying the Identity, however, is often > not an easy task. The language in the OGL is specific, and the grammar has an exact meaning. I'll leave it to one of the lawyers to comment on it, but rest assured that it is not ambiguous. It would probably be worthwhile to complain to the publisher and/or list about works that are particularly hard to separate, in hopes that they will do better next time. When all else fails, do your best and then submit it back to the publisher for comment. If you are nice about it they'll probably help you out - especially if you tell them that they can just tell the next guy who asks for help to go get it from you. You might even ask them to release your version as a new work, just so you don't have to worry about infringing on the original work in case they miss something. Some people will do this for you, others will not. > In terms of how to remove PI from OGC, what is the best method? > To try and > fill in the gaps with an Open equivalent? Simple redaction (i.e. > "... this > sword once belonged to the legendary hero ----, who used it to ...")? > Should redactions be made explicit? I'd do as little as possible. There is a LOT of material out there now and it is growing rapidly. Cleaning up such material will be an enormous editorial task. Perhaps as such an archive matures it will develop a body of rewritten material that cleans up the redacted text. > Whatever the method, though, it seems that there are plenty of > products out > there that do not make a clean separation between PI and OGC. Is there > anything to be done? Wotc/Hasbro can send them a nasty-gram. That's about it. > 3. Credits > > However, section 11 of the OGL says, > >11. Use of Contributor Credits: You may not market or advertise the Open > >Game Content using the name of any Contributor unless You have written > >permission from the Contributor to do so. Marketing and advertising are very different than indexing and searching. Really all you'd need to do is make sure that a web search engine didn't 'bot your site and extract all the names. Section 11 does not preclude searchable tables of metadata. Think of it as the difference between the card catalog and a big sign saying "Get Monte Cook's latest work here for less!" -Brad _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
