From: "Matthew Sprange" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Hey Matthew:
> I think there was a significant discussion of your OGC Declaration. > Can you give us some idea if you intend to continue using the same one. > (I do have a very personal interest in this question as if your OGC declaration is
> going to be considered acceptable then I intend on using the same method
> in my products.)
Given this fracas, yes - if we had used the same system as with Feats, the
problems here would never have arisen. Hence, we'll stick to what is safe.
Based on your response I believe that when I say "OGC Declaration" that you are taking that to mean "Section 15."
I don't. Section 15 is your author recognition. I am referring to the way in which you "clearly mark Open Game Content" as required by the OGL. To wit, as I understand it you guys mark your OGC by stating something to the effect of:
"Every thing in this book that is derivative of OGC is open content."
Does Mongoose plan to continue using the "everything that is derivative" method of designating open game content?
Thanks.
Faust
_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
_______________________________________________
Ogf-l mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
