Man-thing said:
We are not claiming copyright on anyone else's material.
I am not sure if that is possible under the OGL.
OGL said:
6.Notice of License Copyright: You must update the COPYRIGHT NOTICE portion of this License to include the exact text of the COPYRIGHT NOTICE of any Open Game Content You are copying, modifying or distributing, and You must add the title, the copyright date, and the copyright holder’s name to the COPYRIGHT NOTICE of any original Open Game Content you Distribute.
On the surface, you may simply claim not to be distributing any
original OGC. However, you are NOT simply copying someone's OGC. The work involves editing, abridgment, changing words, and so on. It falls under Derivative Material (1b) of the license, and the work is to some extent new. I therefore think it's prudent to add your name to the copyright list, less you be in violation of the bolded part. Better safe than sorry.
I didn't remember the "original" part when answering, though. That does leave a way out to use the license without updating the list, which I didn't remember existed.
Wulf Ratbane said:
I'm not going to dispute you-- as I said, my brain is really not in OGL mode at the moment; I think reading the GSL fried the circuits-- but what "work," what "copy," exactly, do you think Grandwiki has copyrights to?
"work" is referred to in Section 8, which essentially requires all OGC to be part of a well-defined "work" for its proper designation; in this case the "work" is probably the webstite, IMO, but arguably the entry. What Grandwiki has copyrights to is more questionable, but surely any words that are used to replace or abridge original OGC, changes in its structure, and so on. If I change your PI "Emerald Empire Guard" to "Imperial Guard", who does the "Imperial" there belong to? I'm releasing it as OGC, after all. If I change your sentence from "Add this to any character" to "Affiliated Crazons Option: Under this option, you add to any character the ability to..." for editing reasons (perhaps making a single entry instead of one of a series, for better inclusion in a wiki structure) - anyone copying that without license would be violating
someone's copyrights, but whose? To be on the safe side, it's just better for everone concerned to add the wiki's/editor's name to the copyrights list.
As far as I can tell the only "copy" being added by Grandwiki is the Grandwiki copyright notice itself, and that's only being added to the work because it has to be. Ugh.
You are neglecting the various editing changes involved. Regardless, the addition of the name to the list is IMHO prudent at the least.
I think since it's well established that you can present the S15 in any order, it would probably be best to list the Grandwiki copyright as the very 1st entry, so that it is obvious and out of the way of the "actual work."
Yeah, that's reasonable.
I should probably go back and read the OGL again. That's probably a good Step One, huh?
Me too. Forgotten all about the "original" up there.