On Sat, 29 Jul 2000, Doug Meerschaert wrote:
> > While I do not disagree with the motivation to do this, does
> > this clause belong in the OGL? I know that is the only place
> > you can put it as it is currently conceived. I want to ask would
> > this clause really serve other contributors of open content?
> > The only trademark owner who desires such protection (that
> > I can think of) is WotC.
>
> I'm pretty sure that if I slapped "Just like Vampire:The Masquerade!" or
> "d20 rules for Warhammer!" in my game I'd get smacked by WW or GW.
I'd expect that to happen too. I just don't think WW and GW are
writing Ryan saying, "we want to be open content contributors and
would like such a clause in the OGL."
> Quite simply, "you're wrong." If someone wants to use a trademark, they can
> ask. It's just that simple.
I do not think you are criticizing what I said. I think people
should have to enter into an agreement if they want to associate
with someones trademark. I fully understand why a company would
not want to be misrepresented much like I do not appreciate being
misrepresented. I just think we should avoid WotC only agendas
in the OGL. I'd rather see some other mechanism added to the
D20STL to address such issues.
--Kal
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
