A discussion of hybrid open source and proprietary licensing models.

[Rob Myers <robmyers AT mac.com>]

On 14 Sep 2004, at 17:18, Ryan S. Dancey wrote:

> Hello!  My name is Ryan Dancey.  I wrote the Open Gaming License for
> Wizards of the Coast, and I host the Open Gaming Foundation web site &
> email lists.

Hello Ryan.

>  I heard there was a discussion of the OGL here and dropped
> by to offer any information that might be helpful.

Cool.

Regarding clause 5a, representation of authority to contribute.  
Creative Commons didn't put such a clause in the 2.0 CC licenses, which 
I thought was a shame. I've seen it in some other licenses and I've 
seen it waved at people who start fan projects to "OGL" a game based on 
someone else's IP a couple times. Does it that have a specific legal 
effect or is it just to remind people?

One thing that has struck me about OGL stuff is how little seems to get 
re-used. Is that just my perception, or if it's the case why do you 
think that is? There's so many RPGs, with so many similar rules 
systems, that it seems silly to re-invent the wheel each time. It's 
almost as if people enjoy doing it, but that can't be the case for 
commercial projects, surely.

Regarding the d20 license, I'm curious about the clause that means that 
d20 license publications can't include character creation rules. Some 
games that might otherwise be d20 have decided to be just OGL because 
of this, and I'm wondering if it would have been better to have a 
weaker requirement for d20 work and to rely on network effects from 
people getting to know d20 from these projects.

Thanks.

- Rob.