Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8890664" data-attributes="member: 42582">Re your bolded: where does the text of the OGL v 1.0/1.0a confer that right on WotC?Re your underlined: how do you reconcile that with the presence of section 13?Clearly a licence granted pursuant to the term of the OGL v 1.0/1.0a is not irrevocable. That does not show that WotC has any sort of power to revoke it at will. Section 13 makes clear what the consequence of breach is, both for the breaching licensee and for their sub-licensees. That's its point.I don't know if there is any such case. I've already told you that licensing law is not my primary field of expertise.What I am doing is simply explaining that, and why, certain simplistic arguments I have seen posted, that the presence of section 13 makes it "automatic" or "obvious" that there is no other power of termination of the agreement and/or revocation of the licence, seem wrong to me. The reason they seem wrong to me is that they are not applying, in any serious or systematic way, principles of contractual construction. (There is also [USER=7035905]@DavyGreenwind[/USER]'s point about remedy, which I also mentioned upthread at post #190.)The OGL confers various permissions and powers on licensees. They in return come under obligations. When they exercise those permissions and powers, and create new (sub-)licensees, those new parties likewise gain permissions and powers and come under obligations.The more you argue that the whole point of the OGL v 1.0/1.0a is to protect the position of 3PPs, the harder you seem to me to be making the case that consideration has flowed from them to WotC. I have made it clear that, in my view, WotC has no unilateral power to terminate their agreements and/or revoke the licences they have granted. That opinion does not rest on any sort of simplistic argument about section 13. It rests on basic principle of contract law. But given that I am not licensed to practise law in either my own or your jurisdiction - I am an academic, not a practitioner - I am certainly not offering you or anyone else legal advice.I have been prepared to, and continue to be prepared to, explain in general terms what I think are better or weaker views about the operation and effect of the OGL. But if you want a serious opinion on the interpretation of the OGL v 1.0/1.0a, if for instance you are looking for reassurance that you yourself can keep publishing under it on the basis that WotC cannot lawfully revoke it, you will need to retain a lawyer. In my view you are not going to get what you want - either answers, or the skills to create your own answers - by reading a series of discussion board posts.</blockquote>

Verification