|
As I have repeatedly explained in the past (remember the Tolkien situation? Or the IMC license?) my primary goal has always been to help protect the interests of the creators, according to both the wording and the intent of the license. I have heard the views of lawyers (and people who have claimed to have spoken to lawyers) regarding the Diku license. I have seen your points argued many times over the years, and have studied many other licenses as well as drafting my own.
You agree that hobby muds are violating the license by accepting money, which only leaves us disputing those which are run as companies - and the only one of those that I am aware of is Medievia, which also violates the other parts of the license (such as the credits). So in short, no, I have no interest in giving you several hundred dollars to get an outside opinion on a hypothetical situation, particularly not at this time in my life.
|