There are going to be some very disappointed people on this list. . .

> Given that the stated intent of the license (from the very beginning) was
to
> create a community of users, fostering re-use, I would postulate that
> adherence to the license (in ALLL cases) is the cost-of-entry for being
part
> of the community.  That would suggest that it is one BIG license.  If you
> screw it up, you are GONE - no more OGL, no more D20, no more gravy train.

No.  Section 4.

> Matthew, you paying attention here?  Clark is one of our resident
attorneys.

Faust, how can I put this?

First off, when I take legal advice, you can be sure it is not from someone
working for a rival company, no matter how well we have got on in the past.

Second, as much as you may have been enjoying this (I assure you, you are
not alone, a few people have been waiting for something like this), you
_really_ need to stay out of specific concerns that you are not a direct
party of.

All that said, this situation has affected some changes.  I am putting this
down to us being too clever for our own good in terms of the credit
assignment in section 15 of the book in question.  There was no requirement
for us to do so, other than simply list what sources had been used and so, I
believe, that is the way we will do things in the future.

The breach that arose from this will be cured within just a few days.  That
will resolve the OGL issue, which I am given to understand is all this list
is interested in.  If any parties wish to take the matter further with us in
terms of their own copyright, I suggest you get in contact with us directly.

Matthew

_______________________________________________
Ogf-l mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l

Reply via email to