Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FormerlyDickensC" data-source="post: 4351067" data-attributes="member: 53954">I'm beating a dead horse here and reiterating stuff that probably doesn't need to be, but......I think there might be some over thinking of the issue going on.  Licenses really play no role in creating an OGL 4E surrogate.  The only issue is what text WotC can claim as copyrighted, b/c it is only text and nothing but text that WOTC can claim as property....and any surrogate simply cannot use the same or similar (that is anything arguably derivative) text used by WOTC. No other issue matters.  Just don't copy copyrighted text! The problem then becomes determining what text WOTC can claim as owned and what cannot be claimed as being owned.  So all previous OGL content is obviously fair game. And it would be prudent to use a non-derived surrogate term anywhere there is a question of ownership. Just rewrite the 4E books in non-derivative language using the same ideas. Make the language as concise and specific as possible (noting conciseness and specificity are normally mutually exclusive). Avoid any extra non-absolutely-necessary-language.WOTC doesn't own the mechanics, they only own the words.  And the GSL determines how a third party can use those owned-words in their own product.  But a surrogate system is NOT using those words, and the GSL plays no role.Okay, I'm leaving the room.... <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification