Board Thread:Consensus Track/@comment-26893431-20180203204530/@comment-26893431-20180518095502

Atvelonis wrote: Reviving this thread because some folks over at the UESP have had some similar ideas.

I've been thinking about this proposal over the past couple months, and in that time I've started to like "UL" (unlicensed) more than "DEV" (developer). The issues of determining whether certain obscure texts are licensed/unlicensed still remains, but it feels the "neatest" and least subjective classification to me regardless.

Lady Nerevar describes it well on the other thread: "Unlicenced is a simple distinction - did this text appear in something a Zenimax Media Company paid for?" Also, I suppose it isn't out of the question to simply ask Bethesda/ZeniMax for a clarification on licensing info if we need to do so. That's what I was aiming for. Though Lady Nerevar seems to have described it in a much more simple and clear manner than I did, our aims were the same.

Now I suppose we'd just need to have a common vote?