I have not heard any journalist take on this - I was just talking about tubers and people on these forums. And yes, many said it did (like just yesterday even).It's not in the OGL 1.1, no-one ever said it was (or certainly not any journo or the like).
Yes, I see were the confusion started most likely. Thanks to @Enrahim2 's post above. I made the mistake of not watching the video an going off what other people said. The exact behavior I am trying to correct now. It was less of a misunderstanding on my part and more of me reacting to incorrect paraphrasing. Again, I mistake I would like to correct.This has been explained multiple times now. It was in an additional document with 1.1 - the terms sheet.
So this is a good example of a misunderstanding on your part, and you might want to think on that a bit before accusing others of misleading you. People are quite capable of misleading themselves.
Again, I am not asking for the OGL with the signature - but the document, whatever it is, that asked for signatures. I will clarify the OP again.
Absolutely. But I have a better chance if a read it myself and then possibly with corroboration by a legal expert to clarify my understanding is correct.Sure, and that would be fun to see - and one day it might leak - but I'm confident in saying that because it was NDA'd and not hugely relevant, it hasn't. Further you seeing it yourself does not guarantee you will understand it very well. With no insult intended, you might well misunderstand it. Someone like @Snarf Zagyg or one of our other lawyers would be far more likely to have a valid understanding that you could achieve yourself.
Unless I misheard he said something like he could understand how someone could think a signature was required, but I don't think he said anyone signed it.EDIT - Additionally I'd note Kyle has hedged on this. He said both that draft documents can contain signature blocks and so on (technically correct, the best kind of correct), but he also did appear to admit that at least one party might have indeed signed this supposedly "draft" document, which destroys the idea that it was actually a draft in any meaningful sense of the word. He's been vague and that's his prerogative, of course.