Damian wrote:
It never is. Not in the SRD, not in the EQRPG, and not in just about any book I've read.B. The opinion was that the OGC should be clear when you come across it.
The OGC needs to be clearly identiifed _every place that it exists_. The problem with the "appendix" method is that it doesn't indicate what you can copy of the mixed OGC on page 6, it just reprints it in the appendix.
(Now, considering everything else that's gone wrong, the appendix method, by itself, probably won't get you sued--but better safe than sorry, especially when the advice is (1) from a competent professional and (2) charitably given.)
Most OGC works I've seen have a "qualitive" method, where the designation is either "all of this work/chapters X-Y" or "All Sections Q".
If you want a different method, and have page space to spare, a very very clear method would be the "index" method, where you devote space to saying exactly where the OGC is. (This method, of course, is error prone and is not without problem--but it handles "clear identification" better than "all derivitive content is open gaming content.")
A specific fault for the declaration-on-CD idea is that the work isn't Clearly Identified in the way that it's meant to be used. If I don't have a CD-ROM, or I lose the CD, I'm without my declaration. If you want to risk the Appendix method (don't do it), a flyer or bound integral appendix is probably a better way to go.
OTOH, having a CD with your OGC on it _in addition_ to the declaration is a great idea, and encourages proper reuse. Let me know if you run across anyone doing this, and I'll schedule them for my next purchase.
DM
_______________________________________________
Ogf-l mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
