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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Gilwen" data-source="post: 5088469" data-attributes="member: 1871">The only declarations required by the OGL is Section 8 that you clearly mark OGC used, if any, in your work and that you use the notice from Section 2. You are not required to declare anything PI. I think this is a failing of hte license because it creates a defacto third type of content that most call "closed". this sparked a huge debate on the oringal OGL listserv by the participating publishers using the license. Some believed in a default OGC status some belived it fell to normal copyright law for that specific material in these cases.  I think the only thing agreed on was that for it to be decided for sure there would need to be a court case. That didn't stop publishers from releasing what was reffered to "crippled" delcarations that effectively cast doubt on reuse for anyone wanting to reuse that content.I agree that the license is a license to create a derivative work. But it can only declare  PI to the extent that you are given authority to release material as PI. Which does not include transforming OGC sourced material into PI. If the work is wholly original then you could release it under the OGL and PI the entire thing. This does limit how others can reuse your material.Let's look at both wholly originall, non ogc derived works and works that contain original material and OGC (this is the most common useage I have seen).Wholly original work:If you created  Beadles & Bunyips  as a wholly original game and derived nothing from existing OGC, (this means no SRD) then yes you could declare everyting PI or release it as OGC or some mixture of the two  types. You could then relicense it later or create a 2nd edition and release it under whatever license you want. The important thing is that it has not derived from any source of OGC. this means that the section 15 is clear except for the WOTC OGL copyright notice. This also means that I could not derive from your work since there is no OGC material to derive from.If originally released under the OGL as OGC then people could use the OGC in that edition forever no matter how many non-ogl versions you made. I think we agree on that.Mixed work:If you were to release B&B under the OGL as PI but you wanted to include my OGC spells from my work  you could do that. But anything derived from  my OGC must remain OGC no matter how small the changes to the OGC. You could rename the spells and give them new fluff and that could be PI.  The only thing left is the mechanics, if you aren't using the mechanics then I don't see why you'd source it and muddy the waters.  So now we have  combined  work of your B&B system that is PI and my OGC material. If somone wanted to derive from this work their only choice is to derive from the OGC in your work. The only thing OGC is the spells. if they want to derive from your PI then a separate agreement is required.If you were to release B&B under a different license that was not the OGL then you could not use my OGC spells in those other versions. Assuming the spells are my original work I could give you permission to  release them with your non-ogl version. Most likely my spells are based on somoene elses OGC so I only have authority to release them under the OGL as OGC regardless of how I have changed the source OGC. Such is the viral nature of the OGL.The license gives you two types of authority:Declare things PI and to declare things OGC. In section 5 you have to have authority to do this. So your original work can be released as PI because you have authority to do that. You can release someone elses original material as PI only if they have given you authority to do so. The only authority you are given on OGC is to release it as OGC and this includes derivaties of OGC. The oringal author has given you the authority for this by releasing the content under the OGL. This also means that material derived from OGC material can never be wholly released as PI.The original question was about Pathfinder:Section 1 of the OGL defines Derivative Material as: copyrighted material including derivative works and translations (including into other computer languages), potation, modification, correction, addition, extension, upgrade, improvement, compilation, abridgment or other form in which an existing work may be recast, transformed or adapted;Pathfinder, and correct me if I am wrong, uses the SRD and other OGC sources as the backbone. In other words it is a derivative work and is not a wholly original work (section 15 is not clear). The SRD is entirely OGC and barring special permission to PI, so is the other material they have sourced. That being the case anything derived from those OGC sources,  no matter how it is changed, must stay OGC.   Anything that Paizo  adds that is their original non OGC derived work  can be PI'ed. This could be anything from new rules, to names, to fluff and story, etc. And that is the only material that they can withhold permission for reuse. Gil</blockquote>

Verification