On 22 Jul 2003 woodelf scribbled a note about Re: [Ogf-l] SRD released (apparantly):
> >You mean, like producing a d20 product that even refers to a "d20" as > >a variance die or a damage die or anything? Claiming "d20", > >unmodified, as PI basically all but closes off the SRD from being > >used and even talking about rules or task resolution. > > Well, it's the "d20 product" part that is iffy for me. Or, rather, > whether i'll ever produce a work licensed under the WotC OGL and built > upon the D20SRD. Perhaps-- a couple of projects in the works, but one > may not happen, and the other may not end up being D20. Something else that this declaration of "d20" as PI does that I just thought about (along with "d20 system"). Now it would no longer be valid to include the term "d20" in any sort of marketing or advertising, include the back cover text of a product. This means that any company that creates an OGL product, that does not use the d20STL can no longer claim that that it is "based on d20". Additionally, the website claims that the 3.5 SRD is a "revised" SRD. Meaning that it is an alteration of the original. To me this says that it is meant to prevent the use of the term "d20" in products based off the original SRD as well. The inclusion of a generic term such as this will definitely have major repercussions, even more than we currently can think of, I am sure. Upon seeing it, I was tempted to rush out an OGL product that listed as PI the following: d4, d6, d8, d10, d12, decahedron, duodecahedron, and other generic and semi-generic terms. Andy - can you tell us why "d20" was declared as product identity? And what WOTC's intentions behind such a declaration are? Inquiring minds would like to know.TANSTAAFL Rasyr (Tim Dugger) System Editor Iron Crown Enterprises - http://www.ironcrown.com E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
