|
|
|
|
|
by awithrow
1259 days ago
|
|
My guess is they want to keep the overall structure of the OGL while tearing out the parts that can make the license change at the whims of WotC. The ability to carve out portions of a product as trademark/non-reproducible while releasing he rest isn't something covered by creative commons. Without it I'd imagine many publishers would try to hack together similar language and you'd end up with a proliferation of different new licenses. |
|