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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Wicht" data-source="post: 6686424" data-attributes="member: 221">Thank you for the links, but no-offense, but I am not convinced you know what you are talking about... Either that or you are using words to mean things different from what I understand them to mean...The OGL is not an all-or-nothing license. You, as the participant, get to declare which parts of a book are Open.The CC is an all-or-nothing license in and so far as the participant is declaring the entire book to be public domain. As Umbran has already noted, the relationship of WotC to the OGL is not really one of ownership, except in and so far as the copyright of the OGL is concerned, which, due to the nature of the license is a pretty meaningless copyright. WotC has no proprietary interest in the OGL that can be enforced so as to prevent you from using it because they gave it away within the license itself. Using the OGL in no way ties you to WotC. I had already read parts of that dragonsfoot discussion and reached the conclusion many of the people commenting there did not know what they were talking about either.Also, I will note re: the discussion by David Hill, that it is possible to publish a book using both the CC and the OGL, and this has been done (by FATE obviously), but also by Kalos Comics for Bulletproof Blues. The FATE link makes a better argument, though part of their argument is only valid for the CC-Attribute license, and not for the CC-Sharealike license, which some companies favor, nor is it valid for companies which release under both licenses. Indeed, the ability to publish a book using both licenses renders a good bit of their thinking void, except in and so far as they are opening their material to people who only want to use one or the other.</blockquote>

Verification