"As I see it, the major problem with that logo is there's nothing to
tie such products to d20 in the consumer's mind, which is by far the
first thing such a logo would need to do."
The license is quite explicit about claiming compatibility without a
separate permission. No third party logo or OGL logo can claim
compatibility to D&D, the d20 license, or anything without a separate
agreement.
From the OGL, section seven -
"7. Use of Product Identity: (. . .) You agree not to indicate
compatibility or co-adaptability with any Trademark or Registered
Trademark in conjunction with a work containing Open Game Content
except as expressly licensed in another, independent Agreement with
the owner of such Trademark or Registered Trademark."
There seems to be no doubt on that point but people always bring it up
when an alternative to the d20 license is proffered. Bottom line is
always that nothing can replace the d20 license and logo.
This Third Party Publisher designation and logo conforms to the OGL
and is non-restictive in application. One of the reasons that the d20
license and logo cannot be replaced is because no one except WotC is
in the position to make another logo carry the same clout. But
another reason is that whatever else is used in conjunction with the
OGL must follow the OGL. No claims of compatibility are allowed. No
other restrictions can be put on the OGC within the prduct, either,
which is why I believe the designation and logo must themselves by OGC
and not tied to a specific publisher. Notice I make no claim of
copyright on the logo or designation? While it was made by me and was
therefore mine to release as OGC, there is nothing in the license that
requires me to make further claim upon it after release. Plus, there
are plenty enough people who would prefer an OGL designation and logo
that is not burdened by the baggage of other people's hopes, dreams,
and desires, lest they not be concurrent with their own. The Third
Party Publisher designation and logo is baggage-free.
Anyway, the same old replies will now follow to the effect that "it
doesn't mean anything" (which I have already explained why it cannot,
at least at the outset, other than to indicate that the OGL is in
use). And the other I often have heard in the past is "it doesn't
require anything or have any rules to govern it's use" which as I
explained is exactly something it can't have (and which is, indeed,
one of its strengths). But most of these arguments in the past have
come from folks who have invested a great deal of time in their own
personal crusades for an "alt-d20 license" to no real appreciable
effect. I'm sure they'll be along soon to explain why a logo must
have this and do that but they won't see why the logos they have
really don't have this or do that since they have never gained any
real widespread acceptance because of the very baggage they burden
them with.
Have at it, again.
As always,
Mark Clover
www.CreativeMountainGames.com
_______________________________________________
Ogf-l mailing list
Ogf-l@mail.opengamingfoundation.org
http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
