Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8883521" data-attributes="member: 42582">I think not quite - depending on who you mean by &quot;third party&quot;.Given that WotC has a licence agreement with Paizo (on the terms set out in the OGL v 1.0/1.0a), and that agreement requires Paizo both to (i) reproduce the text of the OGL, and (ii) requires Paizo to require sub-licensees to reproduce the text of the OGL, then it must be the case that WotC has authorised that reproduction of its copyrighted text.Now if WotC is trying to argue that it can revoke some or all of the rights it has conferred on Paizo, it will also (in passing) be arguing that it can revoke that permission granted to Paizo. But in such circumstances losing the right to reproduce the text of the OGL would be the least of Paizo's worries! -because Paizo only needs to use such a right if it also has the more important rights (ie to use and distribute WotC's OGC) that WotC has granted on it as a party to the OGL.But my post 479 was considering a scenario in which a RPG publisher who is not WotC, and is not in a licensing arrangement with WotC, wants to licence its own copyrighted work to other parties under a licence having the exact terms of the OGL. (In other words, it wants to create its own ecology of OGC.) That person is a stranger to WotC's licensing arrangements with Paizo and sub-licensees who enter into agreements with Paizo. So they don't have the same argument for permission to reproduce WotC's copyrighted text. In my post I tried to suggest some other bases on which they might nevertheless be able to assert such a right.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 8883521, member: 42582"] I think not quite - depending on who you mean by "third party". Given that WotC has a licence agreement with Paizo (on the terms set out in the OGL v 1.0/1.0a), and that agreement requires Paizo both to (i) reproduce the text of the OGL, and (ii) requires Paizo to require sub-licensees to reproduce the text of the OGL, then it must be the case that WotC has authorised that reproduction of its copyrighted text. Now if WotC is trying to argue that it can revoke some or all of the rights it has conferred on Paizo, it will also (in passing) be arguing that it can revoke that permission granted to Paizo. But in such circumstances losing the right to reproduce the text of the OGL would be the least of Paizo's worries! -because Paizo only needs to use such a right if it also has the more important rights (ie to use and distribute WotC's OGC) that WotC has granted on it as a party to the OGL. But my post 479 was considering a scenario in which a RPG publisher who is not WotC, and is not in a licensing arrangement with WotC, wants to licence its own copyrighted work to other parties under a licence having the exact terms of the OGL. (In other words, it wants to create its own ecology of OGC.) That person is a stranger to WotC's licensing arrangements with Paizo and sub-licensees who enter into agreements with Paizo. So they don't have the same argument for permission to reproduce WotC's copyrighted text. In my post I tried to suggest some other bases on which they might nevertheless be able to assert such a right. [/QUOTE]

Verification