Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8919655" data-attributes="member: 42582">And this won't do for the CC, I don't think. It wants the offer to actually occur automatically, not just be the subject-matter of a contractual promise.The original offer is an offer to the world that the offeror can withdraw at any time, just as the CC FAQ explains.But the automatic offer is not an offer to the world, nor even (as per S'mon's post) something that the licensor has promised to do which it would be a breach of contract not to do. It is meant to be an actual thing that actually occurs, each time a party receives the licensed material. I don't think that's what this is. WotC has not promised each licensee to make an offer, every time that licensee distributes the material, to the material's recipient. It has created a machinery of &quot;automatic offer&quot; that are outside its control, even if it changes its mind.In the case of the OGL I can see how this works, because there is a permission to sub-licence as part of the licence terms, which can't be unilaterally revoked. Whereas this is a bit more opaque to me.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 8919655, member: 42582"] And this won't do for the CC, I don't think. It wants the offer to actually occur automatically, not just be the subject-matter of a contractual promise. The original offer is an offer to the world that the offeror can withdraw at any time, just as the CC FAQ explains. But the automatic offer is not an offer to the world, nor even (as per S'mon's post) something that the licensor has promised to do which it would be a breach of contract not to do. It is meant to be an actual thing that actually occurs, each time a party receives the licensed material. I don't think that's what this is. WotC has not promised each licensee to make an offer, every time that licensee distributes the material, to the material's recipient. It has created a machinery of "automatic offer" that are outside its control, even if it changes its mind. In the case of the OGL I can see how this works, because there is a permission to sub-licence as part of the licence terms, which can't be unilaterally revoked. Whereas this is a bit more opaque to me. [/QUOTE]

Verification