On Sun, 14 Apr 2002, Clark Peterson wrote: > I think Martin is trying to make this way more complicated than it is.
What? Are only lawyers allowed to make things over-complicated? Actually I agree, but I think he's coming at this from the point of view that if the individual entry idea of the netbook doesn't work with the license, your new concept doesn't either. So he's proposing ways to actually fix the license rather than trying to figure out some way to subtly tweak the license to make it work. > I want to find a way to do this easier than how I proposed it. Not more > difficult. So far I think your proposal is about as simple as this can get under the current OGL. But I'm also reconsidering the former netbook proposal, since if your method is ok, I'm not sure why their idea that while the netbook would individually list every item in s.15 but re-users would only have to include the specific item(s) used would be a violation. I do like your idea better though. And I think it does require the very explicit explanation/example you use (just in case anyone else decides to follow Necromancer's lead - I'm sure you'd always include this Clark.) > But of course, I dont expect to constrain the discussion to only my > agenda. :) Ok, so now we know Clark isn't involved in the conspiracy. Sheesh, not even making an attempt to constrain the agenda. Now I'm not even certain Clark's a lawyer. :) alec _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
