Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="robconley" data-source="post: 8889787" data-attributes="member: 5636">So what is the point of having an explicit termination clause if the legal landscape insists on drawing in all these implicit understandings that can only be removed by magic words introduced years later?I apologize for not presenting a reasoned fact-based argument here. But at some point, folks have to step back and say "What is this all for?" "Who is being protected here?"The cases that were cited so far seem pretty reasonable to me like the UK one involving termination clauses and a perpetual clause.But..<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Where the case that upheld a licensor's right to terminate a perpetual license outside of the explicit termination clause?</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Where clause states that there is only a single way for the license to be terminated</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Where the clause also goes out of it ways to make sure that the sublicenses are not impacted by the issue with this one licensee.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Where there documentation from multiple sources (websites faq, listserv, press releases) going back decades shows that the licensor considered the license irrevocable. That these have been available for 20 years.</li> </ul>I get you cited a lot of things to support individual points. but where is the case that evenly remotely approaches the situation outlined above? The closest I found was SCO v. IBM and SCO's case was partially wrecked by the fact they distributed the Linux operating system themselves which at the time (and still is) under the GPL v2 which gives a perpetual license grant but doesn't say it is irrevocable.Sorry to be so testy about this but this thread keeps going round and round on the point of whether Wizards can revoke the OGL 1.0a or not. Especially for license grants made for open content released in the past.Finally this is not for you @pemorton but for all the readers. Are the damn ogl listservs archived anywhere? I feel this exact debate was hashed out back in the early 2000s?</blockquote>

Verification