This is a reply to Corey Reid on the trademark issue.
On Fri, 11 Aug 2000, Corey Reid wrote:
> If someone starts putting out trash that is compatible with my stuff,
> I run the risk of having the public perception of my products damaged.
> And what if someone starts releasing pornographic or extremely violent
> products with my system's name on it? I have to be able to at least
> prevent these people from releasing their products with my system's
> name on them. Which, under current trademark law, I can't easily do,
> if at all.
>
> This is where I see some value in the new clause proposed for the OGL.
How is this "open", then? It seems to me that you want the OGL
game market to be *less* open than the current non-OGL game market is.
i.e. At present, it has been proven possible to publish "compatible
with" supplements without the publisher's permission -- as several
companies have successfully done (Mayfair Games, Companion Games, etc.)
These companies have to live with the danger of being sued, of course.
However, as far as I know no lawsuit has been brought to bear against
such people.
With your interpretation of the OGL, you want to be able to
shut me down if you don't like something that I have released that is
noted as "compatible-with" your product. Thus, if I have any sense,
I should seek out your permission first.
- John Kim
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
