Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Delta" data-source="post: 3981886" data-attributes="member: 40269">Today, I'd have to say I'm skeptical of that -- the people doing publicity on that phone conference sure seem prone to scrample up terms like &quot;OGL&quot;, &quot;OGC&quot;, &quot;Open Source&quot;, and &quot;d20 System&quot;. I think some possibilities could still be (a) the have a business case in place but haven't had the lawyers go over the license terminology yet, (b) the people doing publicity aren't fully trained to to distinguish issues between the licenses, etc.Based on what they literally said today (as you've so well pointed out), they definitely have a technical problem between what they're verbally calling the new license, and what use of that name legally implies via the existing license. I'll look forward to seeing if that's just a mistake, intent to FUD up the existing license, or some surgically-precise new legal distinction (I think the first is most likely as of today).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Delta, post: 3981886, member: 40269"] Today, I'd have to say I'm skeptical of that -- the people doing publicity on that phone conference sure seem prone to scrample up terms like "OGL", "OGC", "Open Source", and "d20 System". I think some possibilities could still be (a) the have a business case in place but haven't had the lawyers go over the license terminology yet, (b) the people doing publicity aren't fully trained to to distinguish issues between the licenses, etc. Based on what they literally said today (as you've so well pointed out), they definitely have a technical problem between what they're verbally calling the new license, and what use of that name legally implies via the existing license. I'll look forward to seeing if that's just a mistake, intent to FUD up the existing license, or some surgically-precise new legal distinction (I think the first is most likely as of today). [/QUOTE]

Verification