Hey Kal:
Remember that there has been very little official information released about
D20 SRD and the restricted terms list. Most of what we have consists of
either speculation or of direct quotes from Mr. Dancey. I think in part we
are helping with these discussion to shape the final documents.
Check out the OGF FAQ <unofficial> we put together to try and track all
these "definitive" answers at:
http://www.earth1066.com/D20FAQ.htm
The recent discussion about what exactly the SRD will look like and what
constitutes a "restricted term" is something that I am just starting to
write up to place in the FAQ.
I would hesitate to throw around terms like "misinformation" as we (like
yourself) are all in the same boat here - trying to understand all of the
ramifications of a somewhat dramatic change that could potentially affect an
entire industry.
Thanks:
Faust
Check out the OGF <unofficial> FAQ at:
http://www.earth1066.com/D20FAQ.htm
>From: Kal Lin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: [Open_Gaming] Copyrights - so what! It's TRADEMARKS the
>issue!!!
>Date: Mon, 8 May 2000 13:12:38 -0400
>
>
>
>I just wanted to point out some misinformation on the list.
>This contributed to my confusion regarding the restricted terms.
>
>Regards,
>--Kal
>
>
>On Fri, 14 Apr 2000, Faustus von Goethe wrote:
>
> > Sorry for the cross-posting and my earnest apologies to those who
>received
> > this letter twice...
> >
> > >... copyrights
> > >and traditionally the better-paid lawyer wins.
> > >
> >
> > Copyrights - so what!
> >
> > In designing a game product INTENDED FOR USE WITH, or DESIGNED UPON
>another
> > gaming system, it is not copyright you need to worry about, it is
>TRADEMARK
> > infringements. The issue is not how close you can come to the rules -
>you
> > can completely mimic them if you want - provided you use your own
>verbiage.
> >
> > IT IS about whether you use terms or phrases in your game that the owner
>of
> > the other game feels are so integral to their system that they
>constitute a
> > Trademark. The legalities are sometimes very gray here, and this
>generally
> > means that the folks willing to spend the most $$$$ in court will win.
> >
> > One of the things that is seriously lacking (and very critical) in the
> > current draft D20 is the list of "Restricted Terms and Definitions"
> > described in section 3.1.3 of the D20 draft.
> >
> > These will be the "words" that WotC will reserve as their Trademarks,
>and
> > will (presumably) spend gobs of money to fight in court to protect.
>This is
> > where I believe this effort will come to a crashing halt, because by
> > defining such a list up front, effectively WotC will be outlining for
>EVERY
> > GAMER exactally what they can get away with stealing. They must be
>having
> > some VERY hot-tempered discussions about this right now, because if they
> > have NO LIST, then they open up their whole source document. If the
>list is
> > very short, it can be used in court to show that phrases like "Hit
>Points,
> > "Armor Class", "Experience Levels", "THACO", etc were not intended to be
> > protected.
> >
> > If, on the other hand, the LIST is very restrictive and does include
>such
> > words, then it will be against your better interests to even develop in
>the
> > D20 system - as WotC will effectively own ALL of it - or be able to
>screw
> > you in court for a long time if they don;t like you.
> >
> > WHY IS THIS SO IMPORTANT? Because T$R was the original 300 pound gorilla
>-
> > by never defining specifically WHAT their trademarks were, they could
> > effectively pay gobs of attorney money and claim trademark violation on
> > almost anything that used their original wording or even concepts - ie
>Hit
> > Points, THACO, etc. (Imagine trying to explain the D&D combat system
> > without using common phrases such as Armor Class, Experience level,
>Armor
> > Class Zero, and Hit Points.) This is one reason why the Mayfair Games'
> > supplements (for T$R products) used HTK (or "Hits to Kill" for their
> > creatures, rather than the phrase "Hit Points".
> >
> > Incidentally, if T$R was the 300 pond Gorilla, Hasbro weighs in at well
>over
> > 2 Tons. It is basically going to be their show - because (unlike
>Mayfair
> > vs. T$R) no gaming company currently in existence will be able to spend
>the
> > money to stand up to them in court on even a trivial matter.
> >
> > Faust
> >
> > >From: "JNielsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >Subject: RE: [Open_Gaming] "Not D20!"
> > >Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 17:27:22 -0400
> > >
> > > > For example, anyone can design a game that uses six attributes that
> > >range
> > > > from 3 to 18 and are determined through various means of rolling
> > >standard
> > > > six-sided die. But they cannot describe this game mechanic the same
>way
> > > > it has been done in AD&D, as that would violate WotC's (and formerly
> > > > TSR's) copyrights.
> > >
> > >Anyone can then expend the money required for the fourteen challenges
>to
> > >this patent application. It's not as simple as it sounds. It's
>expensive
> > >and traditionally the better-paid lawyer wins.
> > >
> > >Jared Nielsen
> > >www.GameCodex.com
> > >
> > >-------------
> > >For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
> >
> > ______________________________________________________
> > Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
> >
> > -------------
> > For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
> >
>
>-------------
>For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
