Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="kjdavies" data-source="post: 8883295" data-attributes="member: 51378">I don't doubt my wording is confusing, I'm trying to describe a scenario I think is hypothetical and I hope is nonsensical because That's Not How It Works...What I meant was<ul>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">If OGL v1.0a is revoked and Paizo thus loses the license to use the open content previously licensed under OGL v1.0a (which I think most of us believe cannot be the case, that while the license might no longer be offered existing licensees would be grandfathered); and</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Paizo has sublicensed the Pathfinder Reference Document (PRD) to their third-party publishers (as they have); and</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">the PRD contains (now 'formerly') open content from the SRD that (in this scenario) Paizo no longer has license to use...</li>
</ul>... does this invalidate the license they have given their third party publishers, because Paizo no longer has license to use the open content that was part of the content they licensed to us?I see OGL v1.0a says that if a licensee loses the license due to their breach that sublicensees are still licensed for the contributor's content (i.e. in this scenario, if Paizo lost the license due to breach then they could no longer use SRD content but still have obligations to let Paizo licensees use Paizo open content), but I think that doesn't apply in this case because 1. Paizo wasn't in breach, the license was revoked, and 2. if OGL v1.0a is no longer a valid license then Paizo can't use it to license their open content to their licensees.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="kjdavies, post: 8883295, member: 51378"] I don't doubt my wording is confusing, I'm trying to describe a scenario I think is hypothetical and I hope is nonsensical because That's Not How It Works... What I meant was [LIST] [*]If OGL v1.0a is revoked and Paizo thus loses the license to use the open content previously licensed under OGL v1.0a (which I think most of us believe [I]cannot[/I] be the case, that while the license might no longer be offered existing licensees would be grandfathered); and [*]Paizo has sublicensed the Pathfinder Reference Document (PRD) to their third-party publishers (as they have); and [*]the PRD contains (now 'formerly') open content from the SRD that (in this scenario) Paizo no longer has license to use... [/LIST] ... does this invalidate the license they have given their third party publishers, because Paizo no longer has license to use the open content that was part of the content they licensed to us? I see OGL v1.0a says that if a licensee loses the license due to their breach that sublicensees are still licensed for the contributor's content (i.e. in this scenario, if Paizo lost the license due to breach then they could no longer use SRD content but still have obligations to let Paizo licensees use Paizo open content), but I think that doesn't apply in this case because 1. Paizo wasn't in breach, the license was revoked, and 2. if OGL v1.0a is no longer a valid license then Paizo can't use it to license their open content to their licensees. [/QUOTE]

Verification