Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8916230" data-attributes="member: 42582">In Year 1, WotC publishes the SRD, with an affixed notice saying that (i) identifies OGC within the document, and (ii) stating that that OGC may be used by anyone who does so in conformity with the terms of the OGL v 1.0a.In Year 2, A accepts WotC's offer and publishes a work that includes, as OGC, X - where X is derivative in some fashion of WotC's OGC. In conformity with the OGL, A includes the OGL in A's work and thus offers to license to all comers on those terms.In Year 3, B accepts A's offer and publishes a work that includes, as OGC, Z - where Z is derivative in some fashion of X. B also conforms with their OGL obligations, which means that their section 15 statement includes both WotC's SRD and A's work.You (FrogReaver) appear to be asserting that WotC, in Year 1, created the licence between A and B that comes into being in Year 3, in relation to work that A did in Year 2. And also that, in Year 1, a licence comes into being between WotC and A (although perhaps A did not even exist at that time - maybe A is not incorporated until Year 2).Or maybe you're asserting that, in Year 1, a licence comes into being in WotC's favour in resect of X (which will not exist until Year 2) and Z (which will not exist until Year 3).Perhaps you're asserting both. In my view neither makes any sense.This doesn't make any sense either. The licence is created by way of contract (section 4). And the contract arises, in accordance with general principles of the common law of contract, when the offer is accepted (and section 3 explains how acceptance occurs).When you say "is how that offer is accepted" (my emphasis), which offer are you talking about?And when you say "becomes a licensee to", what do you mean by that? A licensee is a licensee of something. It is the licensor who licenses that something to the licensee.I can't make sense of what you are saying here.Whose offer? Which contributors? When WotC published its SRD with the notice affixed (i) identifying the OGC in the document and (ii) offering to license that OGC in terms of the OGL v 1.0a, there were no offers from any contributors.</blockquote>

Verification