On Sun, 4 Aug 2002, Steve Creech wrote: > > So hypothetically, would you automatically assume it is OGC and use it > > anyway? Or would you be doubtful and as a clever publisher inquire AEG if > > the VP/WP system is OGC? > > Hypothetically (and ethically), I would contact both AEG and Wotc for > clarification. If you adequately explain how you intend to use it, Wotc just > may just grant you permission also. Incidentally, while I agree that the > wording is bad, I still interpret the statement in Spycraft as indicating > VP/WP being closed content. Unfortunately, it's one of those "read between > the lines" declarations.
Essentially what you are saying goes entirely against the concept of copyleft or "open content" -- the whole point of copyleft is to remove the need to constantly contact the original copyright holder to get permission. And in order for this to work, it requires that everything be clear and no "read between the lines" nonsense is involved. There's actually no need for the OGL or copyleft with your hypothesized behavior. Sure, perhaps AEG screwed up, but from every legal statement in the original Spycraft book, VP/WP has been released as OGC. If WotC hasn't/isn't making AEG correct this mistake, then I see no reason everyone else has to behave as if AEG didn't release the material as OGC. This is the responsibility of everyone who gives someone else permission to use their material -- to make sure they do so in the appropriate way. It is not the responsibility of the outside third party to attempt to mindread an agreement they were not party to. alec (the guy with a law degree who isn't an attorney) _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
