On Thu, 3 Aug 2000, Brad Thompson wrote: > I came to the same conclusion as I listened to all the talk of circumventing > the d20 STL. There has been a lot more talk about minimizing the effect of the OGL. Not many people seem to be concerned about companies overreaching in this regard. In fact, quite the opposite. > I agree that you have to protect yourself and the industry > from this problem. If more brands names, product lines and trademark protection was what the industry needed to revive the market then TSR might have been successful and WotC can do that themselves. My opinion is you need to engage your customers to participate in open gaming. Not put up legal fences to make sure they don't compete with you. > I just don't like the scope of your first proposal. Agree. ------------- For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
- [Open_Gaming] My opinion on why "compatible with&... Ryan S. Dancey
- RE: [Open_Gaming] My opinion on why "compati... Martin L. Shoemaker
- Re: [Open_Gaming] My opinion on why "compati... Doug Meerschaert
- Re: [Open_Gaming] My opinion on why "compati... Dan Carreker
- RE: [Open_Gaming] My opinion on why "com... Martin L. Shoemaker
- RE: [Open_Gaming] My opinion on why "com... Brad Thompson
- Re: [Open_Gaming] My opinion on why "compati... Kal Lin
- Re: [Open_Gaming] My opinion on why "compati... Rick Loomis
- RE: [Open_Gaming] My opinion on why "compati... Brad Thompson
- RE: [Open_Gaming] My opinion on why "com... Kal Lin
- RE: [Open_Gaming] My opinion on why "... Brad Thompson
- Re: [Open_Gaming] My opinion on why "compati... Faustus von Goethe
- RE: [Open_Gaming] My opinion on why "compati... Jason Klank
- Re: [Open_Gaming] My opinion on why "compati... Russ Taylor
- Re: [Open_Gaming] My opinion on why "compati... Faustus von Goethe
