On Tue, 8 Aug 2000, Faustus von Goethe wrote:
> Incidently: In all my discussions I have been referring to a small
> "Compatible with..." label placed unobtrusively on the box to inform
> customers and not confuse.
Since many of the topics you have engaged in have directly involved issues
and claims beyond the "compatible with..." label, this certainly hasn't
been clear. In any case, as the discussion of the use of Microsoft's
logo should have made clear, it is not entirely certain that even your
proposal would keep you clear of legal problems. And even if you managed
to keep the presentation with legally accepted bounds, that doesn't mean
that the threat of others not doing so isn't real and something that
anyone wanting to trademark a product & publish under the OGL needs to be
concern about.
SNIPPED discussion of various legal and illegal activities.
> Our lawyer friends would tell us that this is a stretch because people
> rarely (if ever) get prosecuted for such a "small crime". I don't buy that.
Who are you trying to speak for now, me or Clark? Technically it must be
Clark, as he's the only lawyer who has engaged in this discussion, but
given previous attacks you've made on me, perhaps not. This poor rhetoric
approach of attempting to make the other side's argument, and doing it in
an extremely pejorative fashion, is why I previously stated that I didn't
believe Faustus has engaged in this debate.
For what it's worth, given the extreme factual circumstances described by
Faustus, _I_ certainly wouldn't call it a stretch that the person Faustus
described would be prosecuted. It would still be an extremely difficult
case to get a conviction on however.
later,
alec
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
