Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mark CMG" data-source="post: 6020633" data-attributes="member: 10479">Essentially, the sins of the father cannot be visited upon the son, insofar as it is a case of C acting in good faith.  I suppose if they are asked by A to add something in next time that clears up the error transmitted by B, then it would also be in good faith to do so but the license doesn't set up a mechanism for that.  Your example of a particular spell might be a compelling way for A to convince C if it wishes to go to the trouble but as far as C knows, that OGC was correctly cited in the section 15 of B, might be something B has a separate license to use with A, might have developed independently of A by B, or any number of other scenarios that C simply isn't required to guess.  But, again, you're discussing an individual case that hasn't been challenged and I am discussing what the license says in a general sense.  You and I aren't A, B, or C and thus don't really have standing to put forth any challenges, though if you wanted to send unsolicited advice to C, B, or even A based on your own interpretation of this specific case, I suppose you could do so.I don't know that to be the case.  As an example of one possibility, any company can send a document privately to another with OGC released under any version of the license provided it owns that OGC.  What takes place between any two companies or individuals isn't something I would want to guess in regard to licensing issues.If there is an issue, and as I mention above, without knowledge only held by those involved we ourselves cannot be sure there is one, then there is a 30 day period to cure, yes.  Since the originator of the OGC is the only one who knows for sure, then it would probably require that they be the one to let someone making an error aware, after which the 30 days would likely begin.</blockquote>

Verification