On 11 Aug 00, Faustus scribbled a note about Re: [Open_Gaming] Compatible with:
>
> Ryan was also the one to politely (and rightly, and unabashedly) point
> out, that this clause was being put into the OGL for WotC's benefit.
> (Because of his meeting with the lawyer.) He *believes* it will
> ultimately favor everybody, but this does not change the >fact< that the
> clause is in there *at this time* to protect WotC.
OK, so far all I have done with this topic is just skim over the
messages, but I think that I am gonna go ahead an drop in my own
two cents worth (worth actually much less than that due to inflation)
I have looked at the majority of the arguements (although I do admit
that I have not read them in-depth).
My first reaction to the trademark clause was "ok, big deal". It is
that simple. All it actually does is to tell the person who is planning
on using the trademark of another company, that they must first
ask for permission (unless it has been changed, and I missed a
message). Now, this is, according to my limited understanding of
trademark law, right in line with those laws, hence all it really does
is to attempt to remove the temptation of abuse of another person's
trademarks.
Of course, WOTC's lawyers want this included. They are the ones
responsible for protecting their trademarks. With the focal system
of the OGL being the d20 system, which is almost identical to
D&D3E, I do not blame them in the least! I would want the very
same type of protection.
I am sorry if I upset anybody, but my personal opinion is that those
folks who are argueing against it (and by this point, that distinction
has become kinda murky in many cases), are those most likely to
abuse the use of another's trademark.
I have seen the example about the trademarked character... C'mon,
get real, that is much closer to copyright laws (of which I know
much more than I do trademark law - I have been involved in several
copyright disputes, so I do know a little of which I talk on that point.
One thing that all you folks need to remember is that in order for
Ryan to get the OGL activated, and the d20SRD in use, is to get
WOTC's lawyers approval. Without that, the whole OGL issue (as it
concerns d20) is mute, as d20 will never get released without it.
Again, I reiterate that I am in favor of the trademark clause, as it
reduces the chance of abuse of trademarks, and I for one would not
like to see some company pull the whole OGL movement down
because it was not in there, and some nut inserted abused their
trademark, which then got propogated into several other
products.....
Thanks for listening.....
*************************
********TANSTAAFL********
*************************
Rasyr (Tim Dugger)
E-Mail:
Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Work:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
WebPage: http://www.rpghost.com/rasyr/
Last updated: October 6, 1999
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
