What on earth is WotC trying to do? Yes, they 'own' the OGF, but the whole
point was to promote and encourage the purchase of their d20 products. I
think he has a right to link his other products to a site he is maintaining.
It doesn't hurt the OGF, and since this stuff is free, WotC can't dictate or
restrict how he uses the open gaming content (that's what copyleft means).
I found the FAQ very useful and very comprehensive, and it is a good thing
to have out there.
Give him a break. One would think you're just jealous that you didn't think
of it first.
--------------------------------------
I am not a lawyer, just someone very much involved in the acquisition of
domain names in international markets. What I have seen so far (esp with a
case with Sony and postpet.net) is that Mr Faust has made himself very
vulnerable to being sued. But likely that would not happen because NSI would
just turn them over to Ryan and WotC and tell Mr Faust to go to court to get
it back.
Am I wrong or has the term "Open Gaming Foundation" become free of copyright
by statement of WotC? If not, then he doesnt have a leg to stand on.
A FAQ is great, but the value of a FAQ does not grant any entitlement. The
OGF doesnt determine if something is "free" -- something that is "licensed"
in not necessarily 100% in the public domain.
I consider use of those domain names ethically questionable. If an employee
of my company employed such tactics, they wouldnt be given the opportunity
to clean out their desk.
If I were WotC, Id give Mr Faust an opportunity to turn them over -- if not,
have some lawyers send a letter to NSI to start the process that way.
--Lynn
