Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8897990" data-attributes="member: 42582">In my view this is an inapt analogy. Nothing legally has changed. If there is no safe harbour now, then there never was. If the OGL is an illusion now, then it always was. If the family members are hostages now, then they always were.I mean, I was reading the posts and threads and announcements back when Ryan Dancey started the OGL, and at that time the point of it was supposed to be that it replaced reliance on WotC being nice with a legal entitlement to publish licensed OGC. But now the general response seems to be that, in fact, it was nothing more than an expression of intent by WotC to be nice, which evaporates as soon as some other intent is manifested. In that respect, Dancey's aims seem not to have been realised.ORC isn't any sort of defence for Paizo that I can see. I mean, defence against what?To me it seems to be a commercial device that serves the same commercial purpose for them as the OGL did for WotC when it was released, namely, creating an ecology of 3PPs who contribute to support for Paizo's game(s) and become part of a common (but Paizo-dominated) ecosystem.I don't know what "unsafe hands" means here. The point of the OGL is not to give WotC unilateral control over use and dissemination of OGC. Rather, it's whole point is that it takes OGC out of their control. The only thing that is in WotC's hands is the copyright of the OGL itself, but they have granted express or implicit permission to all their licensees to reproduce it in accordance with the licence terms.Agreed, with one caveat: it frees those publishers from having to reproduce copies of a licence whose text is copyrighted WotC.For those publishers, it would seem to make sense - as soon as ORC is done - for them all to issue quite formal declarations that all the OGC they have licensed under the OGL is now hereby available for licence under ORC. In effect, they all mutually vary the terms of their contracts without having to actually go to the expense of re-releasing everything.</blockquote>

Verification