> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of > Clark Peterson > Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 7:25 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [Ogf-l] Publishing under the OGL > > Lets say I create content: the undead ooze. That is a > thing I created. A conception. A creature. That--in > its form--is intellectual property. I own that. I may > release it as OGC. Now there are two things. There is > the original undead ooze that I created and there is > the version that I released as OGC. Releasing a > version as OGC does not change the fact that as the > creator I own the original iteration of the creature. > So when WotC comes to me to license the monster, they > license the original iteration, not the OGC version.
But this is where I see Wizards as cleverly getting around the problem -- or more accurately, clearly delineating the two different things in such a way that there's clearly no problem at all. By releasing the material in the PHB etc. and THEN in the SRD, it is clear that there's a concept they own and an incarnation they open license. No one can misunderstand this. But now here's what I don't understand: is this distinction between concept and incarnation always the case? Or is this a special case because of how Wizards chose to release? More specifically, does the concept have to have appeared in a non-open form first in order for me to claim that there is the concept and then the incarnation? The PHB/SRD division made sense to me that way: the PHB was non-open, and they had a right to use it in any way they want; and then they chose to use it by creating the derivative SRD, which they chose to open license (I refuse to say "license openly": sometimes better grammar just sounds pretentious). Or assuming I have full, undisputed rights to the material in question, is it always the case that I own the concept (sort of a Platonic ideal) separate from owning any specific physical manifestation of that concept? This seems contrary to the "ideas can't be copyrighted" school, so I think I'm still confused somewhere. Thanks for the education! 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
