Quote:
Originally Posted by soltakss
What you want is the most open possible licence.
|
Fully agree, but it might stop some people from contributing if they have to release all their rights for a setting they have made all by themself (for the shared universe) or from making people make commercial products for the world for the shared world. I think those who contribute entire settings for the shared universe should be able to chose to go for the
noncommercial CC license if they want. For the shared world, I think maybe a
CC license which allow full commercial use also would be the best way to stimulate new material.
Quote:
|
That way, if someone writes something for the shared world and then wants to make it available to other games, say Mongoose RQ, then they could use Mongoose's OGL for the RQ part and this licence for the shared world part with no problems.
|
Hmm... With the CC license, you couldn't add the OGL license on top of it when doing derivative work, as that would restrict the use further. You're bringing up a valid point there.
Quote:
|
Perhaps you could have one licence covering the extra rules and another covering the setting.
|
That might be a good solution.
Quote:
|
GORE is a good basis, since it is very well licensed under OGL. Problem is is isn't BRP as write by Chaosium. All of this would be so easily solved if only Chaosium would create a core SRD and release it under OGL.
|
That would be great, but there's currently no indications that it is going to happen.
Quote:
|
To my mind release all content and new stuff under the widest attribution CC licence. It doesn't stop anyone doing anything with it, but still give credit to the original authors.
|
Not even include the share alike?
SGL.