Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8917056" data-attributes="member: 42582">In a couple of posts I've stated that I expressly bracket that fact.And yes, as per my post not far upthread that is WotC accepting an offer from those parties. What precise legal obligations it places on WotC in relation to their own OGC - and in particular, to what extent it obliges them to offer that to all the world - is not entirely clear. But I'd expect Paizo to have received legal advice about this, given that PF draws from that same pool of 3E-era OGC!FOOTNOTE:The reason I say it's not entirely clear is because the contractual network has an atypical circular character.Normally, the OGL-created ecology looks like this: WotC => A, B, C etc => X, Y Z etc. It's links in an evergrowing chain or network. In this typical case, if X purports to refuse to offer to license their work to all the world, they potentially put A in breach of A's contractual obligations to WotC.But the examples you mention look like this: WotC => A, B => WotC. To the extent that this creates "obligations" owed by WotC to itself, it can waive them. Hence why it's different from the typical case.My intuition is that WotC - unless it reaches some further deal with A and B - remains obliged to offer to license its SRD to them, but probably not to the rest of the world. Again, I'd expect Paizo's lawyers to have a better idea about this than my intuition!</blockquote>