That thread title was only going to cause problems anyway

[jdrakeh]

If that's so, why does section 1 define OGC and PI? I don't understand... are you allowed to write your own section 1 when you use the OGL?

See above and Section 8 of the OGL for more information. I edited my previous post for clarity. A creator can designate anything as OGC that they so choose. Or, at the very least, that's how at least two paid attorneys have explained it to me.

 

[Ry]

OK, I see your point, but here's what I think CC-Attribution has over OGL:

I'm not asking anyone to put a license on their work. All I'm asking for is "Akavar culture originally by Ryan Stoughton." To me, the CC-Attribution is at least a way for me to make a good faith attempt to give up all rights besides attribution, rather than asking some future potential author to investigate licensing and further restricting his work by having to include a license in it.

 

[jdrakeh]

I'm not asking anyone to put a license on their work.

Actually, the Creative Commons Deed requires that "For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the license terms of this work. The best way to do this is with a link to this web page." (i.e., in other words, you must link to or include the license in the work).

And the totally nebulous nature of "Attribution: You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work)." would make consulting an attorney necessary (or at the least, recommended), as the wording of the license leaves you entirely at the mercy of the person issuing it where attribution is concerned.

The truth is that, in neither instance, does the CCD have a clear edge over the OGL. In fact, I'd give the edge to the OGL here as it specifically defines the parameters of attribution in back and white text, while the CCD does not define them at all.

 

[Ry]

I concede.

 

[Ry]

Is this why Blackdirge could write From Dretch to Demon Lord?

 

[jdrakeh]

I concede.

It's not that the CC is a bad license, though it is often ridiculed for its nebulous (and, thus, potentially non-binding) langauge. It's a contract violation waiting to happen, really (i.e., the equivalent of a so-called 'gentleman's agreement' in writing).

 

[jdrakeh]

Is this why Blackdirge could write From Dretch to Demon Lord?

I don't think so. Message board posts are funny. If you post them, you own them.

 

[Ry]

But by that logic, couldn't I write a bunch of posts about aboleths, make it into a book, get it published by EN Publishing, and not include the OGL?

 

[Ry]

I'm referring to this just to clarify.

 

[Fifth Element]

I don't think so. Messgae board posts are funny. If you post them, you own them.

Yeah, just because you post something in a public place does not mean you relinquish your copyright over it. Or something like that.